Laurie Sletten, associate curator for recordsadministration and planning in the archives, saysadministrators are very concerned about timing therelease of their records.

"A lot of people ask us about the 50-yearrule...when they send records to us," Slettensays. "So it does seem to matter a lot to them."

Historians counter that Harvard should be moreconcerned with the demands of scholarship thanwith the fear of publicity. Scholars say it ishypocritical for Harvard researchers to pushgovernment and other institutions for data whenthe University is so unwilling to release its ownrecords.

"I found it easier to get top-secret documentson the H-bomb than it was to getinter-departmental correspondence at Harvard,"says James G. Hershberg '82, author of a recentbiography on former Harvard president James BryantConant' 14.

Hershberg says that while the ClintonAdministration is forcing government agencies toshow why documents should be kept from the public,Harvard puts the burden of proof onresearchers--who must prove that certain documentsshould be opened.

"If it's good enough for the government withnuclear secrets, then it ought to be good enoughfor Harvard with educational secrets," Hersbergsays.

Recent Review

The 50-year policy is as old as the archives,according to Holden. It was first formalized in1968 by a vote of the Harvard Corporation. Thevote permitted the viewing of records less than50-year-old, but only if a researcher could gainwritten permission from the archives' curator andfrom the head of the department where the recordsoriginated.

The most recent review of the 50-year rule wassix years ago, when a Corporation committeereaffirmed the 50-year rule after hearingtestimony from students and historians.

That committee produced a report andrecommendations, but under the 50-year rule, theywon't be available to the public for nearly 45years. The Corporation has yet to respond to athree-week-old written request from this reporterfor an exception to the rule.

Then-President Derek C. Bok appointed thecommittee after historians and Harvard Watch, anundergraduate group with ties to consumer advocateRalph Nader, complained about the overly stringentrules.

Harvard Watch went so far as to organize apetition drive calling for "the free flow ofinformation," including free access to thearchives and to the minutes and agendas of theUniversity's governing boards.

"We want to see the University match its idealsabout an open community of scholars and a freeflow of information with reality," Harvard Watchhead Robert Weissman '88-'89 said in March 1987.

But former Dean of the Faculty Franklin L.Ford, who served on the committee six years ago,says the review led to increased restrictions onthe archives, not to greater access. Student andpersonnel records, he says, are now covered by an80-year rule.

Ford says the committee, which also includedthen-Secretary to the Corporation Robert Shenton,heard testimony from students and professors,including Krupp Foundation Professor of EuropeanStudies Charles S. Maier. Efforts to reach Maierwere unsuccessful.