As the eyes of the national media and student protesters turned towards University Hall last week, 174 Faculty members filed into the building for their regularly scheduled Faculty Meeting.

But more than 400 of their colleagues stayed away. FACULTY

While according to Secretary of the Faculty John B. Fox Jr. '59, full Faculty meeting attendance jumped from an average of 120, most of the more than 650 members of the Faculty eligible to discuss and vote on the case of D. Drew Douglas, Class of 2000, never signed in at the March 9 meeting.

And though some had unavoidable conflicts--out of town appointments and family commitments--others didn't take their seats in the Faculty room simply because they're not used to it.

"I haven't been to a Faculty Meeting since I've been here," says Assistant Professor of Economics Christopher L. Foote, who has taught at Harvard for two and a half years.

"I feel bad that I didn't go," Foote says now. "I should have been there."

Foote says that when he heard that the Faculty was to vote on the dismissal of an undergraduate at last week's meeting, he resolved to attend. But when he didn't write down the date, Foote says, he quickly forgot.

In fact, University officials assume less than half of the Faculty will attend any given meeting--University Hall's plush Faculty Room is certified by the City of Cambridge to hold only 250 occupants.

Controversial meetings in the past, including those held to discuss the Vietnam war and Core reform, have drawn enough Faculty members to force the meeting to be held in alternate locations. But Fox says no such special preparations were made for the lastmeeting.

For some, Faculty meetings are just not apriority.

Foote says that the schedule of a juniorFaculty member--jammed with class time, researchand departmental committees--often forcesprofessors to make difficult choices.

"We don't learn things in Faculty meetings thatwe can put in research papers or teach in theclassroom," he says. "[Faculty meetings] often getpushed to the bottom of the priority list."

In order to help professors free up the timenecessary to attend the full meetings, Facultyprocedural rules prohibit Faculty from schedulingany "class meeting, tutorial conference,examination or other academic activity" from 4until 6 p.m. on Tuesdays when Faculty meetings areto be held.

But not all Faculty members follow the rules.Some classes, especially smaller tutorials, duringthis time.

According to the course catalog, severalcourses taught by professors eligible to attendFaculty meetings are held during the prohibitedtime period, including several economicstutorials.

"I certainly feel a duty to attend FacultyMeetings when important issues are at stake," saysStanley H. Hoffman, Buttenweiser Universityprofessor. Hoffman was giving a Faculty seminarduring last Tuesday's meeting. "When the mainissue at stake is changing the name of adepartment or a program, well, sometimes, Iconfess, I decide I have some better things todo--like teach for instance," he said.

And according to Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R.Knowles, the Douglas vote might not be the kind ofissue that draws the Faculty out in droves.

"This particular issue is one of the Faculty'sconfirmation of a delegated responsibility," hesaid.

The Faculty voted to dismiss Douglas by anoverwhelming majority, after the AdministrativeBoard found that a rape had occurred in the case.During the meeting, Dean of the College Harry R.Lewis '68 moved that the Faculty dismiss Douglason the recommendation of the Ad Board.

Knowles says low attendance might be more of aconcern when academic policies that have a directimpact on the classroom are on the agenda.

Yet, some Faculty members who were absent fromlast week's meeting say the Douglas case itselfmight have been a disincentive to attend.

Emery Professor of Organic Chemistry E.J. Coreywas unable to attend the meeting because of anout-of-town speaking obligation. But he says thateven if he were in town, he does not believe he isthe proper person to decide Douglas' fate.

"I believe in high quality of justice, whichmeans a very high quality of informed judges,"Corey says. "I really think [the Douglas case was]a serious enough matter that the decision ought tobe made by people who really knew everything."

Corey says he just isn't sure if thepresentation of the accounts of the incidentprovided during the meeting could have given himenough information to feel comfortable casting avote.

Others say they don't attend meetings when theydon't feel expert in the topic beingdiscussed--even when the topic is lesscontroversial than disciplinary action.

"This is not an abandonment of responsibility,but rather a recognition that others may be morequalified than you," Knowles says