Students and faculty members of the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) delayed decision yesterday on whether to approve an Undergraduate Council proposal which calls for greater student involvement in the tenure process.

The seven Undergraduate Council representatives who sit on the committee urged the CUE to support the council proposal, while the faculty members said they needed more time to consider the matter.

The proposal recommends that departments hear student input for tenure decisions involving junior faculty members through the departments' student-faculty committees. Currently, these committees only discuss improving teaching and tutorials.

"We feel that the way you're evaluating teaching has to be improved," said Evan J. Mandery '89, chairman of the council's sub-committee on academics. He said that the council's proposal would "formalize a way of getting students involved in the process."

But teaching ability already plays a significant part in tenure decisions, and students may not be able to evaluate teaching properly, said Joel Porte, chairman of the English department. "Our own judgment of scholarship might differ from the way studentswould react," Porte said.

Candidates "don't get [considered for tenure]if they don't have teaching ability," Porte said."Most of [faculty involved in the process] have apretty good sense, through reputation, of who thegood teachers are."

"The main concern is that what is needed issome defined process of student input," saidcouncil chair Richard S. Eisert '88. "We feel thatthe best way for students to have input would beto use the students on the department committees."

Currently undergraduate input into tenuredecision is limited to student letters todepartments, Eisert said.

But council members charged that this systemwas little-known. "It's an abstract system,amorphous and inefficient," Eisert said.

"We don't think the channels are well-enoughdefined for student input," said Margaret L.Ackerley '87.

Porte acknowledged that many professors receivetenure primarily based on their reputations andscholarship.

"There should be no distinction betweenscholarship and teaching, but we know that's nottrue," Porte said. "There's every reason in theworld why a certain percentage of our faculty areworld class scholars, whether or not they're greatteachers." Porte said that Harvard needs suchscholars to maintain its reputation in theinternational arena of scholarship.

But Ackerley said students want assurance thattenured professors can teach. "A lot of the timethe people who are the leading scholars in theirfields just can't teach, and the junior facultyteach a lot better," Ackerley said.

Associate Dean of the Faculty of Arts andSciences Steven Ozment argued, however, thatopening the tenure process to students woulddestroy the confidentiality.

"This is not only a problem, this is a stonewall," said Ozment. "If you open this process up,I think you invite a lot of trouble to theUniversity and a lot of embarrassment to thecandidates.