The recent controversy over affirmative action and grade inflation-and some of the demands made by the coalition of nine minority student groups-have prompted us to question the extent and effect of affirmative action here at Harvard.

We firmly believe in the fundamental goal of affirmative action in theory. We are aware of the social and economic disadvantages that many minorities face in this country. Affirmative action should serve to remedy these inequities by providing disadvantaged minorities with reasonable opportunities.

But we are just as firmly opposed to some apparent examples of its current misapplication. We disagree with some of the recent interpretations of the limits of these special opportunities as they apply to Harvard. In practice, we fear that affirmative action has been misapplied beyond respectability.

For example, the Coalition for Diversity's recent demands for a candidate review process specifically for a Latino tenured professor stretches the limits of this program far beyond what should be considered acceptable. Such a demand is blatant tokenism. It demeans the professor who would ultimately receive such a tenure offer. In fact, it demeans the professor who would ultimately receive such a tenure offer. In fact, it demeans all potential Latino faculty members, who should be chosen for the quality of their scholarship, not merely their ethnic background. Any attempt to increase diversity must not resort to such extremes.

We perceive a similar breach of the proper bounds of affirmative action in the unprecedented second-round admissions search targeted specifically at potential African-American applicants. The search was an instance of Harvard simply trying to change its numbers artificially rather that level the procedural playing field. It was not targeted specifically towards disadvantaged Black students, but just any and all Black students. Harvard should try to recruit more, and recruit earlier, in the minority community, but it ought not to waive deadlines. Although we recognize the difficulty Harvard has in attracting qualified minority applicants, we expect the Office of Admissions to observe reasonable limits in its intense pursuit of a diverse student body.

The original goals of affirmative action are necessary and fundamentally good. But when the policy is overzealously applied, as we believe it has been, these noble goals are debased. Such abuses merit close examination and intelligent debate so that they do not undermine the beneficial effects that affirmative action is designed to achieve.