Students' Council

Despite a successful record this year, the Student Council has not succeeded in convincing undergraduates that it has a real role to play at Harvard. It is threatened by the same apathy which hurt the old Council, and as yet it has failed to convince undergraduates that it has real influence on the Administration--a sine qua non for survival.

Constituents inevitably look for spectacular rather than routine results: extension of Lamont's hours leaves them cold--they want extension of parietal hours; "establishing good relations" with the dining hall administration may be valuable, but students want better food. The problem is that students simply do not understand the Council's role.

There is understandable cynicism about the Council's power. Obviously no Council report by itself can have any direct effect on College policy, for decisions are made only by the Administration and the Faculty, and there is understandable doubt that the Council can convince the powers that be. In the only other sphere of Council influence, undergraduate organizations, there is general agreement that student groups should retain independence and not be subject to Council control.

Within the limits created by apathy and demands for freedom, the Council has done well: It began a series of panel discussions to let students question Administration officers on important policy decisions which are often made without reference to undergraduate opinion. The Council started the Harvard-Columbia Conference on Education which brought delegates from comparable colleges together to discuss common problems. The NSA's failure to provide this kind of program was a major reason for last fall's withdrawal. In both cases the Council filled long-neglected needs with programs which seem to have good futures.

Library hours were extended, primarily through efforts of the Council; revision of election procedures reduced chances of recurrence of this year's difficulties; and if a stop sign is finally installed at Plympton and Bow, the Council will be largely responsible. But undergraduates remained apathetic, and many of the old difficulties persisted.

The work load was shouldered by officers and a few other dedicated individuals; important committee positions and minor chores were frequently left to the same people. While the caliber of membership was raised by appointed members, debate was often uninspired and based on little or no discussion with the students being "represented." Often the end of the meeting found less than a quorum present.

The Council is not, however, intended to be a student control over administration policy. Nor is it supposed to be a legislative body or an advisory body representing the concensus of students. It is, rather, a means of keeping the Faculty and Administration aware of student opinion and of enabling students to have a voice in policy. Often the results will be negligible; occasionally they will be spectacular.

If the Council is to be reasonably effective, students must recognize that every recommendation will not produce Administration action. But this year's Council has registered successes with its reports and recommendations. Faculty decisions will never be made by students, but with a minimum of responsive support, the quiet influence of the Council can achieve greater stature in University Hall.