Should Harvard be a four-year experience, or can the residency requirement be more flexible?

What is the relationship of academics to political problems?

What is the role of research in the University?

Given the financial limitations of the University, how should priorities be determined?

Yet the forces opposing the success of May's venture are imposing. The study did not originate with a Faculty directive, but came from May personally. Thus, after it is completed and proposals have been determined, May must lobby with the Faculty for them. It is more difficult to persuade the Faculty to adopt the proposals of a study it did not sanction than the proposals of a Faculty-created committee, such as the Fainsod Committee.

The variety of the issues to be discussed may lead to a chaotic hodgepodge of half steps-manifested in a general report that comments on Harvard Education but makes no specific proposals or a series of specific, but conflicting proposals.

Yet the wheels have started turning. Proposals are being made and discussed. For better or worse, Dean May's action has started the mechanism which could remake the nature of Harvard undergraduate education.

These are the issues which have divided the University last year. It has been a long and confused year, and out of the conflict have come some far-reaching changes. Harvard has shifted as much this year as in any other year in history. Yet whether the shift has been fast enough or in the right direction remains to be seen.

Can the University resolve these conflicts and redefine itself quickly enough to keep pace with the country and the world? The answer to that question will determine whether this University can continue to exist.