COHERENCE IN ENGLISH 28

In conformity to Harvard individualism, English 28 has not only the general--and unusually irremediable--faults inherent in all survey courses, but a few peculiar to it alone. Once a pure review of the History of English literature, the course now also attempts to foster literary appreciation and to develop a critical sense. This broadened scope, theoretically admirable, has led to a confusion which defeats the purpose of the course. The lectures have little continuity nor is there any correlation between them and section work. The material treated in the various sections, moreover, differs so widely that the course is good, bad, or indifferent largely as the instructors make it. Though the section men set the examinations, the questions in them often refer to material treated carefully in one section, but slighted in another. The result, naturally, is a chaos confusing to even the most conscientious Freshman.

The cure lies in a close-reined and less liberal supervision of the course. The lecturers might succeed, as some already do, in relating their lectures more closely to the material and purpose of the course, without slipping into the easy error of repeating background material to be found in the required reading. More emphasis on the historical aspect of the material would clear many of the confusions existing in the course. But the real remedy lies with the section men. If the course is to become clear and unified they must cooperate, either by regular meetings to discuss their problems and work, or by some adherence to a general outline of the basic material of the course. In the past they have held meetings only to discuss examinations. This would restrict to some degree their individual work, but it would go far to dispel the inky murk which often settles over the novices who take the course.