Leaders in three of the University's largest departments last night registered unanimous disapproval with the tutorial provisions in the report on "Advising at Harvard." All those contacted spoke only for themselves.

The report, made public Monday night, after a two year study, recommended that the five largest departments, Government, History, English, Economics, and Social Relations, scrap their present tutorial systems, in which the top 30 to 40 percent get individual attention.

Under the proposed program, all students would get group tutorial and probably only the top five percent in each department would continue to get individual attention.

Rupert Emerson, chairman of the Department of Government, said, "My offhand sentiment would be that I regret to see individual tutorial cut down to five percent of the students in Government." He added that he considered individual tutorial far more satisfactory than group work.

Both Individual and Group Tutorial

"What I would like to see would be keeping individual tutorial as it is now and making group tutorial available to less distinguished students," Emerson continued, "but I suppose this would involve severe monetary difficulties."

John S. Dusenberry, assistant professor of Economics and a co-director of his department's tutorial program, agreed with Emerson that he preferred the status quo in the College tutorial system.

"My impression has been," Duesenberry said, "that when we handle tutees much below Group IV, it doesn't produce results superior to those we get in the classroom anyhow." Duesenberry explained that the "give and take" aspect of tutorial rarely gets going in sessions with men of low academic standing.

Tutorial Stimulates Students

"Of course there are men now below Group IV who would be brought out of it by the stimulation of tutorial," Duesenberry remarked, "but I doubt that this should be tried by sacrificing the benefits that Group I, II, III, and IV men get now."

The compromise solution between the advising report's recommendations and his own feelings might be an energetic strengthening of the advising system, Duesenberry suggested. Closer advising contact than the present customary "sign the study card" relation might make people show their ability, he thought.

B. J. Whitting, chairman of the English Department, said, "Personally, I wouldn't favor it," but added, "Heaven knows, if it's the only way enough students can get enough advice, some adjustments must be made. It will be unfortunate for those now giving and getting tutorial. I hope as much individual tutorial as possible will be kept."

Neither C. Crane Briton '19, chairman of the History Department, Talcott Parsons, chairman of the Social Relations Department, nor their assistants in charge of tutorial could be reached for comment last night