Nadav Safran was not the only casualty of the revelations about his use of CIA money at Harvard.

Concerned that the ensuing controversy would impair its access to America's academic experts, the CIA made an aggressive bid to bolster its stature on campus.

On February 13, the CIA's Deputy Director for Intelligence, Robert M. Gates, made an unprecedented public appearance at the Kennedy School to appeal for scholars' continued cooperation. Gates also announced that the CIA had revised its rules to give greater freedom to scholars who accept agency funding for research, consulting, or conferences.

"Working with your government to bring about a better foreign policy is not shameful; it is consistent with a scholar's highest duty," the top spy told a restricted audience of about 150 professors and reporters.

In an apparent jab at Harvard's guidelines, considered among the most stringent in the nation and a potential model for other schools, Gates said, "A university steps on precarious ground and threatens academic freedom itself by restricting what organizations a scholar may talk to, especially if one of the organizations is a branch of the government."

Henceforth, Gates said, scholars who independently publish CIA-backed research may publicly acknowledge the agency connection unless the CIA determines "that formal, public association of CIA with a specific topic or subject would prove damaging to the United States."

Further departing from past policy, Gates said, the CIA:

.reduced the scope of its prepublication review to cases in which scholars have access to classified information.

.and adopted a requirement that participants in academic conferences funded by the CIA be told of the agency's role in advance.

The CIA's hope, Gates indicated, was that the new liberal policies would bridge a widening rift between the agency and academia. But key Harvard officials, including President Derek C. Bok and Vice President for Government Affairs John Shattuck, said the changes did not go far enough toward eradicating secrecy and censorship when scholars conduct research for the CIA.

CIA officials refused to indicate how they will interpret the language, "damaging to the United States," when determining whether scholars can acknowledge agency sponsorship of their work. The possibility for broad interpretation of the clause makes it "difficult to see how far the ball has been advanced," Shattuck said.

The CIA's ability to tap Harvard's top minds appeared to hinge on the outcome of the University's own ongoing rules review. To the extent that professors comply with them, Harvard's regulations seemed likely to remain the limiting factor.