( Part I appeared in Monday's CRIMSON.)

(Rick Tilden '71 and Steve Bowman '72 were involved in the activities of New College and are now members of the Committee on Undergraduate Education.)

January Intensive Studies Period

We view the January Intensive Studies period as a time in which the student contribution to the curriculum is acknowledged and augmented and in which experimentation is the rallying cry. Ideally it would be the fruition of the communal ideals that we have been expounding through New College over the past two years. We see the Intensive Study option primarily as a chance for undergraduates and graduate students to direct their own group efforts in learning and teaching through student-initiated and student-led seminar courses and projects. However, we would heartily encourage Faculty involvement in this program as well.

Intensive Studies are to be based in the residential Houses under the administrative jurisdiction of the House Committees on Educational Policy. Since the Faculty of Arts and Sciences has traditionally and right-fully exercised ultimate authority in sanctioning activities as eligible to receive credit toward the degrees it confers, we propose mechanisms to allow Faculty approval for all Intensive Studies.

Starting in September, the HCEP would entertain proposals from undergraduates in its House, from a??graduate student in the University, and from professors in any of the Harvard Faculties. Each Intensive Study proposal would outline the content and method of a course or project to last from three to four weeks in the following January, meeting six or more hours a week. The proposal would indicate who is to be responsible for the direction of the Intensive Study-it may be a student, a professor, or someone from outside the University.

During the latter half of October, the HCEP would interview prospective Intensive Study leaders and discuss their proposals with them, making recommendations to the applicants if they are called for. By the end of the first week in November, each HCEP should compile a list of Intensive Studies it feels could benefit the undergraduates in the House and should file the list, with explanatory information on the Intensive Study leaders, with the docket committee of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. The docket committee would distribute all the HCEP lists to Faculty members for consideration at the regular November meeting of the Faculty or a specially convened meeting during November. As HCEP chairman, each Senior Tutor should present and defend his list before the full Faculty and receive criticisms.

All Intensive Studies approved at this Faculty meeting would be included in a general catalogue of Intensive Studies printed and distributed in early December. Any proposal not included on the docket for the November Faculty meeting could not be considered for the following January. However, proposals that are rejected at that meeting could be reworked and resubmitted in time for the regular December Faculty meeting, after being reviewed by the HCEP. All proposals reconsidered by the Faculty in December and approved could then be included in an addendum to the catalogue.

CREDIT AND LIMITS: Undergraduates and graduate students in Arts and Sciences who enroll in an Intensive Study as participants would receive ungraded credit for the equivalent of one term course. Intensive Study leaders should receive credit for two term courses, to allow them to prepare for their group activities during the fall term. (Other faculties are encouraged to make arrangements for their students to receive course credit for Intensive Studies.) No one would be financially compensated for serving as an Intensive Study leader. Since an Intensive Study should involve intensive work equivalent to at least the load of one term course, a limit of one Intensive Study should be imposed on all participants each January.

Intensive Studies would be considered one-shot exercises, not permanent entries to the curriculum. Experimentation in educational forms should be encouraged, including shared readings and discussion, artistic projects, on and off-campus projects, and meetings with guest resource persons. One group of outside resource persons that we would like to see involved is Harvard alumni.

Arrangements for individual Intensive Studies should also be established. A student could propose to his HCEP a month-long reading project or involvement in some off-campus work. These proposals would be treated like Independent Studies and would not have to be approved by the entire Faculty. But such independent work would normally be able to receive the sponsorship of a member of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

Changes in College Teaching

HIRING AND PROMOTION POLICIES: Ad Hoc committees that recommend Faculty appointments should weigh teaching ability and commitment more heavily in making their judgments. Junior faculty members must not be penalized for demonstrating a solid commitment to undergraduate education. We recommend that the students on the departmental Committees on Undergraduate Instruction be consulted by the members of adhoc committees.

We believe that every Faculty member should devote some time to undergraduate teaching. Since we are encouraging greater flexibility in the apportioning of students' work, we think it only fair that professors should have the same degree of flexibility. To that end, we recommend that the Faculty establish a committee to study the division of Faculty time and to issue proposals to (1) enable each professor and department to make the best use of his or its teaching time and (2) allow for a standard policy of compensating departments for professorial time borrowed for non-departmental education (particularly House-affiliated courses).

Evaluation forms should be given to students to allow them to convey to their professors their reactions to the content and teaching methods of their courses. Students should be encouraged to offer feedback, and professors should be responsive to it.

Many of the large lecture courses given each year should be bracketed and given every other year instead. Lecture courses should, on the whole, be decreased in favor of other teaching and counseling duties for professors. With greater student initiative and responsibility in designing individual programs, the Faculty need not be overly anxious to ensure that the course catalogue cover such a wide breadth of material each year, although there clearly are limits to constructive retrenchment.

Professors who bracket their lecture courses and who still want to lecture during the term should be encouraged to deliver lecture series similar to those of guest lectureships. Departmental compensation might be half a fifth in time, with the other half filled by seminar and advisory work. We would encourage more debates between Faculty members, also.