A contioversial decision by returning Professor of Economics Martin S. Feldstein '61 to terminate the "radical" sections of Social Analysis 10 has prompted both a report by protesting teaching fellows and a major departmental review of the move.

Five section leaders for the course this week sent a five-page statement to the members of the review committee and to the rest of the Economics Department, outlining the benefits of radical sections and protesting Feldstein's failure to consult them before cancelling the optional groups.

The report is the outgrowth of a meeting earlier this fall of most Ec 10 section leaders following the decision and is reportedly backed by the majority of those teaching fellows.

Earlier this fall. Economics Department Chairman Jerry R. Green appointed a faculty committee to review Feldstein's decision and the more general question of jurisdiction of similar disputes concerning course content.

Feldstein was out of town yesterday and unavailable for comment.

Uniformity

Feldstein announced at the beginning of the term that he had abolished the decade-old radical secntion, in which students study Marxist economics in addition to the regular syllabus. He and head section leader Lawrence B. Lindsey said the change would facilitate having more uniform sections for the introductory course, "Principles of Economics."

But many students and teaching fellows in the class, which has the largest enrollment in the College, protested the move, saying studetns should be allowed the chice of learning an additional perspective on mainstream economic thought.

In response to the complaints, Feld stein and Lindsey allowed the creation of a series of four optional evening lectures on radical topics, the first of whih will lake place tonight in Emerson Hall.

But many protestors claim the move is insufficient, because students are busy taking midterms and will not likely attend lectures they know are purely optional.

Report

Using course statistics from the past several years, the report cited the fact that students in radical sections have consistently scored above the coursewide average on exams, and described in depth the organization and purpose of the sections.

Although they said they did not present any startling new facts, the authors added that they may have enlightened some on the details of the issue.

"We probably gave [some faculty] some information they wouldn't have known. People are discussing the issue all the time," said teaching fellow Daniel G. Swanson

Review Committee