THE CALENDAR revision the Faculty finally came up with last week was a lot better than most of the alternatives it considered. Losing intersession is bad, but it doesn't compare with losing spring vacation. Still, the Faculty evidently never even considered what was probably its best option, conserving fuel by recessing during exam period.

Most other periods of the year--the periods the Faculty was willing to cut--are used for a variety of interesting and important activities. During reading period, for example, students read books, write papers, visit friends, and build snowmen. These activities are educational and enjoyable; exams are neither. Accordingly, they should have been the first things to go.

Of course, skipping exams might have made it harder for some professors to give out grades. But abolishing grades to save fuel might not have been such a bad idea either. Like exams and unlike classes, reading periods and vacations, grades neither amuse nor educate. They're important to Harvard's function as a credentials factory, of course, but for most of the university's other functions they're not worth the paper they're printed on--and in a time of a burgeoning newsprint shortage, conserving paper is almost as important as conserving fuel. With a little imagination, the Faculty could have reaffirmed Harvard's dedication to scholarship, led the way for other schools, and generally turned the fuel shortage to a good use. Instead of that, they just debated the exigencies of business as usual.

The calendar revision could have been a lot worse. But it could also have been a lot better.