The Undergraduate Council starts off its second semester tomorrow night with the election of new officers, and student leaders and College officials are optimistic that the groundwork set last term will help in overcoming the legacy of ineffectiveness that has plagued past student governments at Harvard.

Student representatives said in interviews this week that last term's major accomplishments were the distribution of funds, the formation of internal procedures, and the establishment of a strong attendance record. These actions, they explained, clearly distinguished the council from its predecessor, the Student Assembly, widely criticized as ineffectual.

Although the council made no major changes in College policy during its inaugural semester, members emphasized that just getting organized in the first several months has been an important first step.

"The first term was very productive, at least in terms of making rules that will govern the council in the future," said Council member Steven Rapkin '83.

Departure

Representatives said that simply holding meetings which were orderly and well attended marked a departure from the practice of past student governments, which often struggled to maintain a quorum.

Members said that for undergraduates outside the council, the establishment last term of procedures for awarding grants to needy student groups represented the most visible achievement.

The deficit-prone and now-defunct Student Assembly, for example, rarely financed organizations or sponsored events. But as Harvard's first term-bill funded government, the council has already awarded more than $9000, plans to allocate $23,000 in additional grants, and is now organizing a series of campus-wide social events--beginning with tonight's "Battle of the Bands" in Memorial Hall.

Members were virtually unanimous in giving much of the credit for the council's initial success to Michael G. Colantuono '83, a highly effective organizer who will step down, as council chairman with tomorrow's elections.

Colantuono argued, however, that merely bettering the record of the old Student Assembly, is not adequate. The key to making the council into a significant and respected part of the College's policy-making structure, the departing chairman said, lies in making full use of the council's new channels for communicating with the Faculty. By sending representatives to the three major student-faculty groups--the Committees on Undergraduate Education, College Life, and Housing--the council can more readily translate student opinion into substantive policy changes.

Council members listed a variety of issues slated for consideration this spring, ranging from financial aid and sexual harassment to summer storage and the status of non-resident students. But so far, the council's links to University Hall have yet to be used. The problem, it seems, is that the council's desire to make quick changes conflicts with the slow, methodical pace of Harvard's decision-makers.

"Just because we can speak more effectively and more clearly doesn't mean that anyone's going to be listening," Colantuono said, adding that in order to be useful, the council needs to conduct the kind of thorough research that College administrators like to see when evaluating policy.

This view is also shared within University Hall. Archie C. Epps III, dean of students, explains that if the council can shift its focus to include an in-depth approach to policy matters, it will likely play a more significant role "The best idea, the most well-researched ideas, will always win out at Harvard," Epps said.

Recognizing the need to increase productivity and devote less energy to general discussions, council members said that they are likely to spend more time this term in the body's small, policy-forming subcommittees, which deal with specific matters and make recommendations to the entire 89 member council. Such recommendations will probably form the core of any new ideas that the council funnels to the student-faculty groups.

Through last month, the council's subcommittees--Academics, Student Services, Communications and Finance, Residential, and Social--were responsible for a range of pursuits mostly unrelated to College policy. These included the review of grant applications and planning a set of "teaching awards" to be given in the spring.