Once again the battle lines are being drawn for the debate which has become the residential life issue of the past two years.

As several house maters and first-year students continue to wage war against a proposal by Dean of the College L. Fred Jewett '57 to partially randomize next spring's house assignment lottery, they have also touched off a wide-ranging ideological debate about the very principles of diversity around which Harvard's undergraduate life revolves.

Jewett and a growing number of followers say the current system--which maximizes student choice--has resulted in a housing situation that is unacceptable at a school which strives for diversity. They cite a growing bulk of evidence that several houses have skewed populations of varsity athletes, Asian-Americans and other minority groups, and they say such living arrangements foster stereotyes and prejudice.

Last spring Jewett was forced to withdraw a proposal to randomly assign 25 percent of the spaces in eight houses when several masters refused to participate in the experiment.

And this fall, a group of first-year students has already gathered the support of 1171 members of the Class of '93 who oppose attempts to change the lottery.

But this year the dean has repeatedly asserted his authority to override master's opinions if he sees the need. Both President Derek C. Bok and Dean of Faculty A. Michael Spence have said they will back whatever proposal Jewett makes to them.

"I worry if a house gets to a situation where people are deterred from applying there because of perceptions that the population there would not welcome them," Jewett said in an interview this week. "The stereotypes are becoming more negative."

But leery of administrative attempts at the "social engineering" of residential life at Harvard, several masters say Jewett's proposal to randomly assign at least 50 percent of the spaces in all 12 houses is both unnecessary and futile. Such a move promises to make the houses more homogeneous and lessen their importance in the life of the College, they say.

And on a more personal level, even first-year students who have acknowledged the value of diversifying the houses say they are reluctant to become the "guinea pigs" of Jewett's experiment.

'A Community of Tolerance'

Insisting there is nothing wrong with students of similar interests living together, some masters and students argue that house life is especially rewarding when it offers an opportunity for people to form organized activities and support groups, such as the Lowell House Opera and the Adams House improvisational groups.

And the need for a critical mass of people with common interests is even more important to help "invisible minorities" create "a community of tolerance," says Adams House Master Robert J. Kiely.

Other masters say they feel the same way about the need to preserve student choices in selecting the environment in which they will spend three-fourths of their time at Harvard.

"Harvard College is stressful enough," says Eliot House Master Alan E. Heimert '49. "Students have a right to live in a situation that is most comfortable and least distracting."

Kiel and Heimert, the College's most senior masters, add that while certain groups indeed may be underrepresented in some houses, no group is unrepresented.