The rate of the College's struggling Afro American Studies Department may be discussed this year. Formed more than 10 years ago after a bitter conflict between students and administrators, the department now suffers from a lack of student interest. Last spring, no member of the class of 1985 opted to major in Afro-Am.

THE DRAFT

College students all over the country are likely to rally around an issue that was the center of the glory days of student activism. Two years after President Carter reinstated draft registration, the federal government began enforcement procedures this summer indicting four young men for failing to sign up.

At Harvard, a five opposition has been basically nonexistent. The night after Carter's announcement hundred rallied in front of Widener to protest the move but since then peace groups have been largely inactive drawing criticism from local anti-draft organizations.

But if the wave of indictments send students back into the streets this time administrators may join them. Harvard officials as well as administrators from other universities have sharply criticized a plan which has tentatively passed both houses of Congress linking student and with draft registration compliance. The final version may allow the Department of Education to force schools themselves to carry out the enforcement a set-up which many say would be a bureaucratic headache at best, and which undoubtedly could prove controversial in the University community.

INVESTMENTS

Should Harvard divest its stock in corporations that do business in South Africa? For many years, student activists have said yes, linking economicties in that country to facit support for the apartheid government. University officials have answered that it is not that simple, and that pulling economic resources out of South Africa would not lead to better living conditions for the suppressed Black majority there.

But this fall, the University's governing Corporation will consider for the first time ever a proposal to divest from a company doing business in South Africa.

The business in question is Carnation Company, which has been cited for flagrant violations of widely accepted conduct guidelines for U.S. companies operating in South Africa. The University has not endorsed these guidelines, called the "Sullivan Principles," nor has it established its own criteria for judging the conduct of companies in the troubled African country. It has, however, banned investments in banks that loan money directly to the South African government.

While the South African investment question has been burning for several years, a new question may this year get more attention: investment in companies producing nuclear weapons. Harvard holds stock in several companies involved at least indirectly in the production of nuclear arms, including General Electric and Dupont. In the fall, the University Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility (ACSR) will vote on whether to endorse divestment from such companies.

The ACSR as a 12-member board created of students, faculty and alumni created in 1972 to give the Corporation non-binding advice on ethical questions surrounding the investment of Harvard's money. The University portfolio is currently valued at $4.7 billion, and it accounts fo 18 percent of the University's annual income.

The committee considers numerous shareholder decisions and investment policies in its private monthly meetings.

NUCLEAR ARMS

In his Commencement speech last June President Bok outlined a more active role for the University in educating people on the issue of nuclear war. "There is," he said, "surely no more important subject than an issue that involves the very survival of our planet."

Following up on that statement. Bok has requested five Harvard nuclear arms experts to write an educational book and he has asked the Kennedy School's Institute of Politics to sponsor a series of educational forums