Nash Questions Monro's Freshman Seminar Plan

Leonard K. Nash '39, professor of Chemistry and General Education, last night strongly questioned the practicality of Dean Monro's proposals for freshmen seminars. Nash expressed doubts that such a program of small group instruction would be "economically feasible" in the freshman year.

Alarmed at the growth of "vocationalism," Monro last month suggested that seminars might give a freshman a greater feeling of intellectual participation than a 50-minute prepared lecture. At the core of the seminar would be a freshman "thesis." Speaking to the last point, Nash noted that freshmen already face a plethora of term papers.

Nash pointed out that the "great men" necessary to operate such seminars successfully would be overloaded, and thus unable to spend enough time with each group of students. Though he noted that freshmen "mature faster if you treat them as mature students," Nash wondered "just how mature first year college students really are--even Harvard students."

In his own course, Natural Sciences 4, Nash assigned a term paper months before it was due, asking students to prepare a rough draft and consult him. "Out of about 10 students," he said, "only five ever showed up, and many probably didn't begin preparation until the day before it was due."

Noting that the section system was originally designed to provide intimate discussion under stimulating leadership--(also the goal of Monro's seminars), Nash said that sections are "not as brilliant a success as they were." Although he sympathized with Monro in theory, he explained that the graduate students who lead sections "may be the great minds of tomorrow, but not of today."

Freshman Reading Period

Commenting on Monro's call for more free time for freshmen, I. Bernard Cohen '37, professor of the History of Science, advocated a reading period for freshmen, not just for upperclassmen. The students in my course are very mature, he said, and "I'd like to be able to turn them loose."