Harvard maintained a low profile last month when legislators in Washington started taking a disgruntled look at federally-enforced, affirmative-action hiring goals in schools and colleges--so low that the University seemed to be out of the action altogether.

The House of Representatives took two steps, separate in point of origin though related in apparent intent, which may lead to the outlawing or undoing of affirmative action.

The first, more overt move on the Hill was Congress's first "comprehensive re-evaluation" of the "civil obligations" of colleges and universities by a special House Subcommittee on Education.

In a series of ten hearings over a period of six weeks, aides to the subcommittee reported, Chairman James G. O'Hara (D-Mich.), ranking minority member John Dellenback (R-Ore.) and a "majority" of the 13 members "became convinced" that affirmative action's voluntary hiring goals are "virtually quotas," and that they must propose legislation that will outlaw it.

The second, less obvious move that may affect the life of affirmative action came in a rider to an educational appropriation bill, which passed the House October 1.

The rider, proposed by Rep. Marjorie S. Holt (R-Md.) and now hung up in the Senate Appropriations Committee, would prohibit the Department of Health, Education and Welfare from requiring "any school system" to keep statistics on the race, gender, religion or nationality of its teachers and students.

Drafted primarily as an anti-busing measure, the Holt amendment would in effect spell the end of affirmative action, should universities be included in its "school-system" jurisdiction.

Harvard officials, hosts of a national affirmative action conference last week, said they were "unaware" of the Holt amendment, and said they did not testify before the O'Hara subcommittee.