LAST WEEK IT became known that Kennedy School Dean Graham T. Allison '62 approved a proposal to bestow University Officer status on an oil-rich Texas couple in return for a $500,000 gift to fund the School's creative and worthy loan forgiveness program. A number of Harvard officials last week dubbed the K-School fund-raising tactics a "loose cannon". In the words of one Harvard official, the K-School "is on the make. They prostitute themselves more." President Bok needs to look into the ways in which money is exchanged for prestige University-wide. Dean Allison, if he cares enough about the Kennedy School to want to see its image restored, should resign as its dean.

"It is clear," Allison said in his only public statement on the affair, "that the handling of this case does not meet my own standards or the standards of the University." Unfortunately, Dean Allison's tenure gives one every reason to wonder if his standards rule out such behavior. His desire to get money and power for the Kennedy School seems to outweigh his concern for the school's reputation and educational mission. Despite his claim not to have read closely the proposed agreement, Kennedy School officials maintain that Allison was involved at all stages and was given a preparatory memo that asked: "What is the most prestigious title she can buy for 250K?

Two years ago, he brought embarassment to the school when he unilaterally decided to award Attorney General Edwin Meese III with a medal commemorating the school's 50th anniversary. When it was pointed out that Meese represents much that the K-School ought to be teaching people not to be, Allison apologized for not consulting the faculty. The medal, though, was still granted.

On Friday Bok said, "The issue is clear cut. No one should receive such a position at this University by virtue of a donation to Harvard, but only because of superior qualifications to perform the responsibilities of the post." The issue may be clear cut, but President Bok should be more aware than he seems to be of failures to meet his ideal. How, for instance, may the common practice of naming big givers such as Ivan Boesky to seats on visiting committees be reconciled with the notion? Does wealth give someone the right to evaluate a faculty? Harvard should face such questions forthrightly.

Somewhere between allowing someone to put his name on a building in return for a donation, and selling an academic post, a line should be drawn. President Bok has correctly seen that Dean Allison's proposed deal is unacceptable. Now he should go further and make clear to administrators just how much of Harvard is for sale.