According to Secretary of the Faculty John B. Fox, Jr. '59, Faculty engagement on these bodies is cyclical, alternating between times of genuine passion--such as during the Vietnam War--and calmer days. Fox calls recent years an "ebb" in terms of Faculty involvement.

Since the beginning of the 1998-99 school year, the Faculty has met as a full body only twice, despite a schedule that usually calls for one Faculty meeting a month. And at those meetings, which offer a rare opportunity for Faculty to address all of their colleagues as well as President Neil L. Rudenstine, few Faculty members have chosen to speak.

"We've had less discussion this year than any other time since I've been here," says 17-year Faculty member Cynthia M. Friend, who is the Richards professor of Chemistry.

Many attribute this lack of discussion to a growing consensus that committees can be trusted and no longer need the oversight of their colleagues, who are frequently removed from the issues at hand.

"For as long as the Faculty trusts its delegates (on committees and councils), there needs to be less discussion in plenary session," wrote Knowles in an e-mail message. "The full Faculty needs to intervene either when it ceases to accept the views of its delegates, or when the issues are significant enough to require new policies."

This trend is also reflected on the Faculty Council, the 18-member committee that reviews Faculty policies before passing them on to the full Faculty for final approval.

Formed not long after the Vietnam War, Fox says the committee once met every week, considering up to 10 issues at a sitting. The Council now meets only twice a month and reviews but two or three issues. Lessened interest also forced a change in the nominating procedures for the body, which is elected by a secret vote of the full Faculty.

While candidates once needed nominations from 20 of their colleagues, the process now operates on a "sliding scale," in which a prospective candidate can enter the race with fewer than five nominations.