WHAT if they gave a conference and nobody noticed?

What would happen, for instance, if delegates from all the Ivy League schools, Stanford, M.I.T. and the University of Chicago went down to the University of Pennsylvania, spent four days discussing common problems and possible solutions, agreed on principles of action, and went back home to work on these issues, while nobody really knew that a conference had occurred? Well, you would have the Little 11 conference, which took place February 22 through 25 in Philadelphia.

From the outset, the conference was beset by organizational problems, most notably the ineptitude of most of the conference organizers. Rumors kept circulating that the whole conference was, in fact, a sham cleverly disguised by a small group of Ivy League students, who knew each other from high school back in Harverford, Pa., to have a reunion financed by their student governments. The rumor, strangely, seemed credible--all these people could do was pass resolutions, talk for hours on end to no purpose, and argue about procedure. Nevertheless, 20 Harvard-Radcliffe students thought it worth their time and effort to do the research necessary to prepare reports for each of the eight committees of the conference, and then go down to Philadelphia for the four-day meet.

THE conference suffered from a basic flaw: on most campuses, conference planners could not reach the students as a whole or generate sufficient interest to involve more than a handful of people, almost all of whom became delegates. How could delegations hope to implement the conference's policies, and how could they pretend to speak for their schools?

Yet, while it is true that many delegates were hard-core student government types looking for that extra line on the resume, most were genuinely interested in learning how students were faring at other schools, how other administrators worked things, what ideas other students had to gain more student control over university decisions.

The conference might have worked as a giant workshop. Just the exchange of information on what different schools offered in the way of curricula, student services, amount of student self-government, would have made it all worthwhile. The individual committees--on issues ranging from academics to student life to the role of the university in social and political affairs--could have pooled information, come up with a comparative report, offered some suggestions. But somewhere along the line, many committees got lost in the effort to come up with resolutions (calling for divestiture of investments in South Africa, among other things) and neglected to develop a reasoned critique of current university practices along with strategies for student action to change those practices.

THE information exchange did take place, despite all the sound and fury, and the results are fascinating. Often Harvard tells us our suggestions are completely impracticable, while innovations such as alternate meal plans, programs for study abroad, relaxed academic regulations and in creased student participation in administrative decisions have already been implemented at other schools. Did you know only Harvard charges an extra $450 facilities and activities fee if you want to live off campus? Did you know Princeton turned down a donation from the Engelhard Foundation a few years ago? Did you know the University of Pennsylvania has student trustees? By keeping us ignorant of how things work on other campuses, Harvard keeps us quiet, on the whole. By beginning communication, the conference potentially strengthens all student movements.

If anything held back the conference, it was the conference planning committee. They never involved the campuses as a whole in the conference, never forged ties to campus political organizations. Almost all the minority students who did get involved were placed on the minority affairs committee, and they reacted by boycotting the conference after several days of discussion and presentation of a seven-point plan to combat racism by the Big 11. Moreover, the absolutely crucial question of how to follow-up whatever decisions the conference came to was left until the very end of the plenary session.

By then, most delegations were fed up by the conference organizers, who in a thousand small ways demonstrated their inability to run the conference efficiently. About 30 minutes before the conference was scheduled to break up, one of Harvard's organizers read a plan for an organization to ensure that conference decisions got translated into action, and that delegates continued to exchange information. The organization was also intended to run next year's conference.

By this point, most people didn't even know if this conference had been worth it, let alone whether they wanted another one. At first students tried to amend the proposal to knock out the seven slots afforded the current conference organizers and to change the wording so that there might be a conference next year if people thought it wise. But resentment and grumbling was rising in the ranks. The organizers put a new chairman in charge of the meeting to keep order, but he couldn't stem the rebellious tide. Eventually, delegates tabled the whole idea in disgust, thereby leaving the question unresolved and saying, in effect, "If you guys want a new organization to play with, go set one up yourself."

THE Harvard delegation has not met since returning from Philadelphia. The plan now is to present all conference findings to the appropriate Student Assembly committees for consideration, and to also work on translating resolutions and suggestions into action here. Conference organizers themselves have set up a follow-up network, and some more issue-oriented, progressive delegates who were on the conference's student government committee plan a meeting later this year. Activists on various campuses have exchanged names and phone numbers. So, for Harvard at least, some tangible results have occurred.

The Student Assembly gave $200 to the Harvard delegation to defray some of its costs, and now the Assembly wants to know if it got its money's worth. Since the conference passed about 40 resolutions--all pre-packaged and ready for Assembly use--you might say the Assembly got a bargain at $5 apiece. And please, no Philadelphia jokes.