But putting the Guide in its proper perspective doesn't necessarily mean prohibiting its use altogether, says Whitla. "It's a very useful source of information. It's one of the things that should go into consideration."

But Whitla adds that he does not oppose Ozment's decision to suspend Harvard's use of the guide to evaluate teaching fellows.

"It's quite appropriate that the system we've been using be reviewed," Whitla says.

Part of the problem, professors say, is that the Guide was designed primarily for student use. It was never conceived, they add, as the answer to the Faculty's tenure dilemmas.

When members of the Committee on Undergraduate Education addressed the Faculty's use of the Guide at a recent meeting with the CUE Guide staff, the issue took the editors by surprise. They said they did not realize the Guide was used to formally evaluate instructors.

"Obviously, the CUE Guide is written with a particular audience in mind," says Lewis. "But popularity among students is not equitable with quality in teaching. You have to read and interpret the evaluations very carefully.

Okran, the book's editor, to say whether she thinks the Faculty should refer to it when teachers' jobs are at statute. "People rely on the CUE Guide out of necessity,' she says. "Everyone wants it," irritation, and information is hard to get."