A harsher criticism that some faculty level is that of conscious discrimination on the part of one or more department, members during closed deliberations. Skocpol's case is the example cited most often, perhaps because alone among the candidates denied tenure, she utilized the University's grievance procedure, but some professors allude to other cases in which they say sexual discrimination may have played a role. For example, one professor in the Fine Arts Department notes that the department has chosen men to fill four of its last five tenured professorships over the last decade, although the pool of qualified personnel from which it can draw has become nearly evenly split between men and women.

Of those four male appointments, the professor says, three clearly "had the edge" in quality over competing female candidates--but in the fourth case, "the department wanted somehow a junior edition of itself." Oleg Grabar, chairman of the department, explains that the appointment in question reflected "a kind of judgement of the facts that the man was chosen was more interesting and imaginative" than the woman over whom he was chosen. He declines to identify either candidate but says that the charges that departments reproduce themselves have "some truth" in relation to gender.

Department chairmen and Rosovsky deny that there is widespread discrimination, though they acknowledge that in years past male biases did lead departments to consider only male candidates. As late as 1969-70, the Faculty still had no women, though it had several in earlier years. Among today's departments. Rosovsky says. "I do not believe it is a question of discrimination on average, but there may have been some." Nathan Glazer, professor of Education and Social Structure and an outspoken opponent of affirmative action, agrees, saying. "I am not cognizant of any discrimination on grounds of sex in Harvard appointments." One female professor, however, says she speaks for her female colleagues in saying of women professors, "You're intimidated, there's a great deal of pressure on you, you can be blacklisted--it makes it very difficult. People have to speak out."

Rosovsky points out that he meets regularly with all departments that underutilize women or minorities, particularly "to make sure searches are properly conducted"--noting for example whether departments advertise vacancies sufficiently. He denies the contention of one professor that he threatened that professor's underutilizing department by warning that if the department did not hire a women in its next appointment, he could not approve any alternative selection. "I would never say to a department that you can only appoint a person of a separate sex or color. That is not what is meant by affirmative action."

Still, some professors suggest that considerations of gender, which once acted against women in tenure discussions, now often help female candidates. In theory, Rosovsky says, affirmative action means not only giving women candidates equal opportunities, but also possibly choosing a female candidate over an equally qualified male. However, he notes. "You hardly ever have equal qualifications." Nonetheless, some professors say references to gender occasionally crop up in tenure discussions. Though most decline to give details of such deliberations, one female professor says of the colleagues who chose her, "They claim, and I'd like to believe, that my gender had nothing to do with it. But they were relieved to have filled the position with some one...who was also a woman." She adds. "When you have a department that has no women, obviously that department is discriminating."

Interestingly, the four departments that will gain a tenured woman next year--Anthropology (Sally Falk Moore). English (Marjorie Garber). Psychology and Social Relations (Ellen J. Langer, associate professor of Psych and Soc Rel), and History (Angeliki Laiou)--all were underutilizing. Department members decline to comment on whether gender played a role in those deliberations, though Rosovsky had met beforehand with the four and the underutilizing departments.

Most department chairmen deny that Skocpol's unprecedented grievance case will affect their future tenure considerations, especially since the procedures did exist previously. Some professors, however, argue that underutilizing departments will now prove more conscious of potential repercussions when considering cases of promotion. "I think people will be more careful. The administration is putting on more pressure," one professor predicts. Another, who asked not to be identified, suggests that fears of a similar incident might have made the Psych and Soc Rel Department more sympathetic to Langer in its considerations this winter. And just months after Skocpol's complaint, Josephine Wright, assistant professor of Afro-American Studies, filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission charging the University with discrimination on the basis of sex and race in denying her a one-year contract extension. But Faculty remain nearly unanimous in agreeing that the threat of external suits--like the complaint filed this fall against the Kennedy School of Government by a nationwide women's group--does not deeply affect departments in making tenure decisions.

Grabar contends that most departments will recognize the Skocpol case as an aberration, explaining that "I don't think that the department [Fine Arts] could be foolish enough to come to a formal vote as Sociology did" in failing to promote Skocpol. In response to Rosovsky's advice that the departments hire more women and to the recently-implemented minority and women faculty study, though. Grabar says Fine Arts will now stress finding strong female candidates more than identifying needy subfields in the department and then trying to find individuals to fill them. However, he cautions. "The subfields in art history in which women are prominent are less fashionable subfields."

The recent study will have little impact in increasing the proportion of tenured women and minorities, many predict. Its emphasis on more aggressive recruiting will likely pay off with additional minority and women junior faculty, they say, but will have little impact on tenured appointments.

Professors like Zvi Griliches, chairman of the Economics Department, predict that some departments may take advantage of the special permission the report grants to departments with qualified minority or woman candidate but no opening--but say this opportunity will not raise dramatically the proportions of minority or women faculty. But Griliches does note that Economics is "in the process" of considering a woman for a tenure appointment--and depending how the department decides to define the post, it could become the first department to take advantage of the new opportunity provided by the study.

Pockets of resistance, notably Mansfield, remained opposed to the proposal. "Any attempt to introduce any other factor" besides merit into tenure decisions. Mansfield says, "will quickly take us into trouble. Tenure decisions are always hard--the temptation to temper justice with charity is always there and must be fought against constantly." Considerations like potential contribution to the University community should not affect the decisions, be argues, saying that the use of such criteria "would be like choosing the Boston Celties for what they can contribute to race relations in Boston."

Nonetheless, most agree the University has improved its affirmative action status in the last several vears--in particular, hiring increasing numbers of tenured women and tightening up the tenure process to make it better able to locate and then hire qualified women and minorities. Probable demographic forces--like the maturing of age groups containing qualified women--will further serve to increase Harvard's population of tenured women.

The primary point of contention is whether Harvard should act to accelerate the assimilation of women that otherwise will occur gradually, and the incorporation of minorities that seems likely to occur even more slowly. Based on the beated debate over small steps in that direction, like the minority and women faculty study that provoked such sharp disagreement this winter, such issues seem likely to continue to spark controversy indefinitely.