AT AN OPEN MEETING with students last week, President Bok told his audience, "If you want to effect social change, either join a church group or buy your own stock." The Coalition for Action and Awareness, formed by representatives of ten student groups, has answered by calling for a student boycott of classes Monday, April 23.

It is unfortunate that Bok places so little value on the role of student opinion in University decision-making. Had the administration heeded the students' point of view, as evidenced through petitions, polls, marches, and rallies, as drastic a move as a boycott would never have needed to take place.

There are two issues at the base of the proposed action. The more publicized issue is that of divestiture. In the past year, student and faculty have demonstrated deep and wide-ranging support of Harvard's divesting its South African stock. Over 3000 students signed petitions calling for divestiture, and they were subsequently joined by over 100 faculty members.

Yet the administration has ignored student and faculty opinion in its consideration of the issue. One would imagine, from the actions of the administration, that Massachusetts Hall comprises the University, while we, the guests, merely reap the fruits of their benificence during our temporary visit.

The second issue, concerning the fate of the Afro-American Studies Department, hits closer to home but is less widely understood.

The department was born in 1969 in a direct response to student demands that the University offer an opportunity to study history from a black perspective. Afro-American studies has something unique to offer: years of studying the past from a Euro-American slant can be balanced with a different and generally neglected perspective.

YET THE DEPARTMENT'S ten-year history has been rocky. Despite recommendations by two visiting committees that the department receive at least four additional tenured professors, only one-and-a-half faculty members hold tenure in the department. Afro-American Studies is the odd man out, the only department funded solely by Dean Rosovsky's office, with no share in monies gained from donations to the University.

At present, a third visiting committee is surveying the department to determine if it should be relegated to committee status. As a committee, Afro-American studies would not control its own curriculum, and would lose the independent perspective it now offers.

It seems ironic that Rosovsky, the man who so strongly opposed the creation of the department in 1969, will next month make the ultimate determination of the department's status.

The administration blames the problems of the Afro-American Studies department on the lack of professors willing to join the department. but while the University keeps the status and funding of the department so tenuous, it can hardly expect to attract outside professors.

Though problems in the Afro-American Studies department are not as widely publicized an issue as divestiture, those students most immediately concerned with University action against the department hope to win fellow students' support for the department. Petitions calling for increased tenured staff and funding for the department are at present circulating the Houses. Returns from four Houses alone show over 500 signatures; the final amount of student support remains to be seen.

Yet even though a majority of students support divestiture, and even if similar support were shown for the Afro-American Studies department, the effect of such support thus far has proven negligible.

The administration does not believe that it is a matter for our concern when our tuition dollars support racism and oppression in South Africa.

The administration says we overstep our judgement when we demand the opportunity to view history from a unique and valuable perspective.

They are the University, and we just transients with no voice in decisions that affect us.

We reject that position. faculty, students and administration all hol integral and necessary roles in the functioning of a university. Their voices in the decision-making process of a university should be heard accordingly.

But since the administration clearly cannot hear a quiet voice, perhaps they will hear a boycott.

We hope students will show a commitment to either or both issues on Monday, not merely by boycotting their classes, but by actively joining the picket line.

We urge faculty, also, to stay away from their classes, and unite with students in demanding that the University hear their voices.