To the Editors of The Crimson:

The Committee to Strengthen Afro-American Studies (CSAAS) has rescinded its position on the question of the appointment of Lawrence Levine as a tenured professor in the Afro-American Studies Department (AASD).

The change is not based on the University's threat that "if one does not come the other two will turn down the offer." Whether this is true or not, we can not get into a habit of reacting to the statements of an administration which has misled us in the past. We should instead make our own independent assessment of the situation.

Secondly, we did not change our position because of The Crimson articles, although the articles prompted us to check our sources. We felt that given the nature of the criticisms of Levine it would be unwise for him to admit to them. In fact, Levine never explained why his current research grant is to study the cultural history of the depression and not specifically related to Afro-American Studies. Neither did we think that members of the Ad Hoc Committee were good "third party" sources. According to the EEOC findings against Harvard the Ad Hoc Committee, which reviewed Ephraim Isaac for tenure in 1975, was purposely biased against Isaac by University officials.

We have seen at Harvard numerous other miscarriages of academic justice executed by "unbiased" Ad Hoc Committees (e.g. Molly Nolan and Arnold Harberger). Because we know the history of academic fairness at Harvard, statements from members of the Ad Hoc Committees mean little to us.

We changed our position after speaking with a real "third party"--a well-respected professor in Afro-American Studies who teached at an uninvolved university. Our talk with him showed us that the issue of Levine's academic qualifications was not as clear cut as we had initially believed. The conversation with the professor did not necessarily contradict the information on which we based our objection, but it did point out that our info was one-sided and shallow.

Some people took our demonstration against Levine as anti-Semitic. We had no intentions of being anti-Semitic. Our support for Ephraim Isaac (a Jew) supports that claim.

The possibility that Levine was to be chair of the Department further prompted the CSAAS to oppose his appointment. Due to the principle of self-determination we still feel that the Afro-American Studies Department, an institution made possible by the struggles of Afro-Americans in the streets in the '60s, should remain under the leadership of Black people--particularly in this crucial building stage. We found later that he was not being considered for the chair.

We feel that the whole issue reflects the distance between the student supporters of Afro-Am and the tenuring process. It also shows how much the students have been affected by the past 11 years of insincerity, neglect and hostility of the University administration towards the AASD.

We regret the mistake made with regard to Levine and take responsibility for it. We recognize the need to fully research our facts and substantiate our claims. We hope that in admitting our mistake we can correct our errors and remain the focus of student interest in the AASD. The Committee to Strengthen   Afro-American Studies