Masters Refute Criticism Of Student-Faculty Bonds

The recent Student Council committee report calling for greater institution-alization of informal student-faculty relations in the Houses drew criticism yesterday, as Masters defended the present system.

"Student-faculty relations are better at Harvard than anywhere else in the country," John H. Finley, Jr. '25, Master of Eliot House, said. Finley added, "if there is to be improvement, students must make active efforts and not wait to be guided by the hand."

Gordon M. Fair, Master of Dunster House, defended the two tutors to a table custom. 'Student-faculty relations are very good in our House; if everyone's system is like Dunster's there shouldn't be any trouble," he said.

"When the Houses were first established students feared they would have proctors watching every move they make," David E. Owen '27, Master of Winthrop House, said. "It's one of the successes of the House system that we are now hearing the other tune."

"Relative" was the key word in the response of Elliott Perkins '23, Master of Lowell House. Perkins pointed out that student-faculty contacts "are certainly far better than they were before the Houses were built. On the other hand, there is certainly room for improvement."

While praising the House system, the Council committee's report had insisted that many avenues of student contact with tutors are still unopened. Perkins agreed partially with the report, suggesting that more resident tutors, less over-crowding, and an effort to have all sophomores take tutorial in their own Houses would promote closer student-faculty relations.