Admissions officers used the phrases "minority recruiting," "special recruiting" and "recruiting students from non-traditional backgrounds" interchangeably at last weekend's conference of 200 alumni recruitors.

This show of vocabulary reflects the stance they took at the gathering; that the problems of minority recruiting were difficult to define, without easy answers or solutions.

Their stance could also be defined as a pitch to the alumni that minority recruiting is something good for Harvard and Radcliffe, and that they, as affluent, middle-aged whites, could be successful at it.

Alumni response reflected the admissions staff's theme, except that the alumni had a lot of questions for the officers who offered "no easy answers." No alumni questioned the reasons behind the recruitment drive. They seemed to accept the stated principle of "diversity" and were willing to do what Harvard and Radcliffe requested of them.

After the session, some alumni complained that they didn't know what to do. They wanted techniques, guidelines and specific goals, the opposite of the officers' statements that "energy and legwork," not "magic wands" and "special formulas" are the approach.

Alumni reaction to their role is critical to the plan. Last year, when Harvard's minority applicant pool shrank by 24 per cent, some admissions officials charged that alumni's lack of involvement, or outright discouragement of candidates, had played a large part in the drop.

The conference raised a lot of questions but not many definitive answers. But the response of the delegates, all representatives of Harvard-Radcliffe Clubs' Schools and Scholarships Committees, will be important in determining how other alumni react.