In response to objections raised by some of his students, the dean of the Harvard Medical School may resign from the board of directors of one of the nation's major drug companies.

Two groups of medical students have appeared in the last few days to ask Dr. Robert H. Ebert, the Med School dean, to give up his seat on the board of Squibb-Beech-Nut Inc., makers of Squibb pharmaceuticals.

A group of second-year students-in a letter to Ebert that will appear in tomorrow's CRIMSON-claims there is a basic conflict of interest between Ebert's role as a corporation director and his responsibility to the Medical School.

Ebert will meet with the other group-made up of third year students-today to discuss the same questions. Ebert said last night that he is "perfectly prepared to resign" from the Squibb board, but that he wants a chance to talk with students and explain his situation first.

There are no charges of financial impropriety. When Ebert became a director last January, he owned about $15,000 worth of Squibb-Beech-Nut stock and was eligible for a yearly salary of several thousand dollars as a director.

Over the summer, Ebert decided that the arrangement might give the appearance of a conflict. He says he tried to resign from the board, and finally agreed to stay on as a "public" director. He sold all his Squibb stock and no longer has any personal financial interest in the company's performance.

What the students have argued, however, is that Ebert cannot fill his role as protector of the medical consumers' rights as long as he also has a responsibility to a commercial drug company.

The 19 students who signed the letter to Ebert said they "cannot help but view such an arrangement [with Squibb] as a conflict of interest," and urged Ebert to leave the Squibb board.

To explain their view of the "conflict," they said that:

the medical community of physicians and medical schools should be "a severe and constructive critic of the so-called ethical drug industry";

physicians - and the schools that educate them - havea first obligation to "the patient, his welfare and well-being both medical and economic";

corporation directors, on the other hand, owe their loyalty to "the stockholders of that corporation and to the profits of that corporation."

The letter went on to say that the drug companies' profits are primarily determined by physicians' prescribing habits, which are developed in medical school and the first few years after it.

A legislative aide to Senator Gaylord Nelson (D-Wisc.) joined the attack on Ebert's role at Squibb. He said last night that "there is absolutely no question" that Ebert is involved in a case of conflicting interests.

Nelson's Senate Select Committee on Small Business recently held a series of hearings on the role of drug companies in the current American medical situation.