Professors Disagree On 'Mixed Tutorials'

Departmental officials disagreed this weekend on the advisability of mixed tutorial groups. Discussion was spurred by formation of the new Radcliffe Committee on Tutorial, which will study the issue.

The History Department, on one hand, has "tended to concentrate the organization of tutorial on a House basis," said Myron P. Gilmore, Chairman of the History Department. For that reason, History tutorial, especially on the sophomore level, is now primarily homogeneous, with either all Harvard or all Radcliffe students.

Although Gilmore saw no "a prlorl reason why a mixed tutorial group would work better or worse than a homogeneous group," other officials declared themselves in favor of mixed groups.

Stanley H. Hoffmann, head tutor of the Government Department, said that the Department has "informally changed" the structure of tutorial groups in the past year, organizing a number of mixed groups in various Houses. The change was made "because Radcliffe girls seemed to feel discriminated against, and also because the mixed groups seemed to work better," he said.

Section men in Government 1 tend to prefer sections containing both Harvard and Radcliffe students rather than homogeneous groups, Hoffmann noted.

Personality, Not Sex

Robert F. Bales, professor of Social Relations and an expert on group dynamics, said he would emphasize the background and personalities of the students, rather than their sexes, in evaluating the type of group organization preferable. However, he noted that in Social Sciences 112, "Human Relations," "hetrogeneity is preferred in discussion groups because the existence of different perspectives leads to interesting discussions."

All three men agreed that the prime problem concerns sophomore tutorial. On the junior and senior level, more attention is given to fitting tutee and tutor on the basis of specialized interest than on the basis of House or College affiliation.