The Overseers have modestly advertised their recent report on expansion of the college as no more than the "opinions of a group of outside visitors, devoted to Harvard's interests." As such, their statement can be praised, particularly for the way it clearly raises many important questions and problems the University must soon face. It is hard to avoid the conclusion, nonetheless, that the report ignores a good many questions and leaves several assumptions unstated when it makes its unequivocal recommendation "that Harvard College should grow in response to the pressure of population."

As the CRIMSON's two previous editorials on expansion have stated, we think that the University does have some responsibility to the nation in dealing with the educational demand and that Harvard should try to expand itself numerically. The University must, nevertheless, attach some very specific strings to any such plans. It is in virtually ignoring any such qualifications that the Overseers present a misleading picture.

The Overseers explain that they were led to their decision to recommend expansion largely by their "sense that the problem of educating large numbers of our young people is so enormous and so important to our country that no college for whatever reason can afford to stand aside." "For whatever reason" is in itself a rather bald statement. If such attention to the problem were to mean lowering Harvard's educational standards, the Overseers are wrong. Aside from this objection, however, the Overseers' reason leads to their recommendation for expansion only with the intervening unstated premise that the only way for Harvard to deal with the national problem is to increase its own numbers. As Saturday's editorial pointed out, however, it would be quite possible to deal with the problem without expanding Harvard College. The University could still prepare others to teach, throw its energies into research on the problem and, above all, hold up its own standards as an example to the nation--in case it does find itself unable to enlarge the College without lowering its quality.

Having once made this unjustified assumption about "the only way to deal with the problem," the overseers proceed to increase the confusion by making a lot of little mistakes. They astutely point out that there is nothing inherently "sacrosanct" about the present size of the college at 4,500. This observation is well taken, but it hardly proves that the University should expand, any more than it proves it should contract. Actually the college's present facilities just barely accommodate the present enrollment; buildings, professors, and supplies are probably as "sanctifying" reasons as it is possible to find for remaining at the present size, at least temporarily.

The Overseers are also too fond of common sense opinion. In referring to faculty problems and over-size classes, they remark, "We are prepared to accept the commonsense opinion of one of the students that 'Once a class gets bigger than fifty it may as well be a thousand.'" Although the student they interviewed probably has a lot of common sense in most matters, it is questionable how versed he is in problems of teaching. Most educational journal articles and educational texts on the subject disagree; dozens of university faculty members who have been interviewed since the report was published are united in literally laughing at this particular "common sense opinion," no matter what their feelings about other aspects of the expansion problem.

The Overseers glibly admit that "problems of site and financing can, of course, modify any expansion," but say such considerations are beyond the scope of their survey. They were right. Such problems undoubtedly are beyond the scope of their survey; but so, sadly enough, are their conclusions. It is this same vague commitment to expansion, this conviction that "Harvard must expand" without first dealing with the practical problems involved and setting the necessary conditions that could be terribly dangerous to Harvard's future. If several price tags-- retaining tutorial, faculty-student ratio, comparatively small classes, adequate library facilities, and the like--are not attached to expansion, many "Harvard excellencies" may disappear before they are missed, to be regretted only after they are irretrievable.