Regression

THE promise of a more productive relationship between Cambridge schools and the city's universities was jolted last Tuesday night. The school committee voted down a motion to give $6000 to a panel of five area educators, who were to help in the search for a new Cambridge superintendent of schools. And veteran Committeeman James Fitzgerald appears to have the votes to dissolve the now-penniless panel of advisors before it has a chance to advise.

The issues of the superintendency battle are depressingly simple. The four Independents, who jealously insist that outsiders like the local educators be excluded from any part in their selection process, are indulging in the same mindless parochialism that won Louise Day Hicks her numerous following. Fitzgerald's motion should be defeated, but barring that, the Independent majority should at least have the honesty not to limit the committee's search to faithful local cronies.

The plan to draw in expert help for a national talent search was the frankly apolitical motion of Independent George Olesen, a parting gesture toward progress as he left public life. Politics is back now. And beyond the immediate danger that Cambridge will not even consider hiring a superintendent from outside its ingrown system is the deeper threat that the Independents will take the easy course of becoming a mechanically anti-intellectual, regressive majority.