"Diversity is the hallmark of the Harvard/Radcliffe experience," the Colleges' admissions catalogue begins. While admissions officers love to brag about that hallmark, they sometimes encounter difficulties trying to maintain it, especially when it involves achieving racial diversity.

The challenge was a little stiffer last year after the release of a preliminary report by Robert E. Klitgaard '68, associate professor of Public Policy at the Kennedy School and special assistant to President Bok. The so-called "Klitgaard report" stated that Blacks and other minorities who do well on aptitude tests do not perform as well academically as their scores would seem to predict. It also envisions the possibility that Blacks might be more comfortable at a "lesser" university where their intellectual abilities would more closely match those of other students.

The Klitgaard report elicited strong reaction from around the campus, including a disgruntled admissions office. "The great tragedy is that students here and the general public as well may erroneously believe that Professor Klitgaard's preliminary draft represents either general University opinion or even the conclusions of some individual admissions offices at Harvard. This misconception could cause severe harm to the admissions goals of the University..." a statement from the undergraduate admissions office said.

Admissions officers now say they are not sure how much--if any--harm has been done. But they admit that the report has had some effect on Harvard's minority admissions recruiting. "We took extra pains to show that we wanted minority students here, " William R. Fitzsimmons '67, acting dean of admissions and financial aid, says. "The release of the preliminary report certainly had some effect on minority students here, and it could well have made the difference in whether some people applied."

And David L. Evans, a senior admissions officer involved with minority students, says the report was released at a bad time--just as a new administration entered Washington with what appeared to be a very conservative mandate. Blacks were already worried that Reagan might wipe out many of the existing social programs, and the Klitgaard report "gave some sanctity to this concern," Evans, who himself is Black, says.

Following nationwide publicity of the report, prospective students, parents, counselors and alumni began to question admissions officials. They asked if Harvard would be hospitable to minority students; they wondered how minority students actually do here; they wanted to know who Klitgaard was. For some, concerns about the Klitgaard report were linked with fear engendered by threats last fall on the life of the president of the Black Students Association, Lydia P. Jackson '82, as well as the negative reputation of Boston. People sometimes called the Klitgaard report "just another case of Harvard's racism," Evans says.

Admissions officers in turn attempted to allay concerns, sometimes broaching the Klitgaard subject themselves when travelling in places where newspaper headlines about it had recently appeared. Officials tried to demonstrate the importance of diversity to Harvard and, in general the successfulness of Blacks here. They also stressed that Klitgaard's preliminary report reflects only his own opinion. The officers insisted that the report has had no effect on their affirmative action policies and explained that they approached their decisions about whom to admit in exactly the same manner as before last fall.

Despite the admissions officers' unchanged position on admitting Blacks and their attempts to soothe Blacks' concerns about Harvard, though, both the Black acceptance rate and the Black yield--the percentage of Blacks accepting their offers of admission--declined for the Class of 1985.

The drop in the committee's acceptance rate of Blacks--from 27 to 24 per cent (while the acceptance rate for non-Blacks remained at 15 per cent)--had nothing to do with the Klitgaard report, admissions officials say. While they do look at economic background and at "what applicant can contribute in many ways," admissions people are not looking specifically at color when they make their decisions, Fitzsimmons says. "There is no target, no quota. Our committee goes through and picks the best candidates." Fitzsimmons says. "There is no target, no quota. Our committee goes through and picks the best candidates. Fitzsimmons describes Blacks who applied for the Class of '85 as "very, very strong," but adds that they weren't as competitive compared with other applicants as they were the year before.

Admissions officials also say they have not seen evidence that the drop in the Black yield--from 73 to 69 per cent (while the non-Blacks yield remained at 75 per cent)--is related to the release of the Klitgaard report. The study was not mentioned by any of the Blacks who turned Harvard down, officials says, although extensive surveying of people who opted for other schools did not occur this year (such analysis takes place every three to five years and last happened in 1979). Fitzsimmons calls the yield decline insignificant, while Evans says that, if anything caused the decline, it was economics. "I can think of a handful who just couldn't deal with the money. With the cost higher, parents says they can't handle it," Evans says. Evans adds that the tough economic situation probably affects Blacks more than whites.

And the influence of the Klitgaard report on admissions may continue to linger. The final version of Klitgaard's report is due to be released soon, and the publicity form the earlier report continues: earlier this month, for example, NBC-TV included discussion of it in a "Whie Paper."

Some admissions officials, such as Rosemary Green, assistant director of admissions, believe Klitgaard's preliminary study is essentially a moot topic. "It's not an issue at this point. We dealt with it as far as we're concerned, and it's not begin discussed now," Green says.

Others seem to disagree. "We're still very concerned about the implication of the report. I think prospective candidates do know about it," Rubin Alvero, head of minority recruiting, says. Alvero notes that the number of Black applications rose significantly (from 664 to 751) last year. But he and other officials also point out that nationwide publicity of the Klitgaard report did not really flare up last fall until after most people had applied and until after the admissions officers' travelling season (which ends around Thanksgiving).

One potential problem involves students who are rejected by the admissions committee. Anytime there are almost 14,000 applicants, of whom 12,000 are qualified to attend, there will be students saying, "I was not legitimately rejected," according to Evans. If someone then points out a particular group as "illegitimate," as Evans believes Klitgaard did, it may reinforce the students' claims, he adds, noting that some people did complain this year that the admissions committee has filled the class with "unqualified minorities."

Of perhaps even greater concern to admissions officials has been the effect of the Klitgaard report on minority students here. They say that while the report has received some attention off campus, it has become common knowledge in Cambridge. Fitzsimmons says the increasing number of minority students attending Harvard in recent years is largely attributable to redoubling of recruitment efforts by Harvard's minority students, who now may have lost some of their enthusiasm. In addition, the report and complaints by rejected students appear to have put undue psychological pressures on Harvard's minority students, who may feel put upon to question their right to be here, Evans says.

For their part, secondary school counselors don't seem to think Harvard has much to worry about. Ralph Ferrara, head of the college office at Stuyvesant High School in New York, who first heard of the Klitgaard report on television, says it's hard to get enough feedback from his 800 students to know if the report had affected them. While he notes that many minority students are seeking a small school, where they can receive closer attention, Ferrara doesn't think the report alone tarnished Harvard's reputation.

A number of secondary school counselors interviewed don't seem even to have heard of the report. John Kane, the new director of college placement at Philips Exeter Academy, says he is unfamiliar with it, although he adds that he doesn't "really pay close attention to the daily newspapers." While minority students at Exeter have some concerns about Amherst and Williams Colleges, he says, they don't seem to have any real worries about Harvard. Kevin Bowers, a guidance counselor at Boston Latin High School, also says he had not heard of the report. With about 70 people applying to Harvard each year, Boston Latin sends "all types of minorities" here, Bowers says, and they don't appear to be worried about whether they will be welcome.

While the men and women in Byerly Hall may worry a bit about the effects of the preliminary Klitgaard report, they want to hold off final judgement until the final report is released. But even if the next version is wanted down, it may not overshadow any negative results of the preliminary draft. On the other hand, the lure of the Harvard name may reign supreme--provided the admissions office continues to disassociate itself from Klitgaard's opinions. "Students that plan to apply to Harvard," the Stuyvesant High School counselor insists, "will apply anyway."

of Jews. Qualitatively, this explanation fits the observed facts. Quantitatively, its adequacy deserves further study since other explanations are also plausible.

120. Affirmative action programs go beyond the purview of the present report, but a few observations may be relevant. In fields where high test scores seem to be a pre-requisite for adequate academic performance, "affirmative action" may imply remedial education rather than lower standards or greater recruitment efforts in very limited pools.

121. Remedial efforts might include summer programs, special courses and counseling, and other efforts. In evaluating such efforts, three effects should be distinguished: (a) recruiting already capable students from other schools or disciplines (which might only lead to an inefficient and possibly unfair "price war"); (b) pre-screening applicants who as a group are too risky but among whom some are capable and can be identified through the remedial program; and (c) raising the ability of the students to carry forth their studies at Harvard. To my knowledge, few careful evaluations of remedial programs have been carried out.

122. Across universities and fields, black students tend to be about 1 to 1 1/2 standard deviations below whites on test scores and significantly lower on grades as well. Both blacks and whites may notice this pervasive disparity. In theory, this may be an undesirable result of affirmative