PROMOTING CONTACT

To the Editors of the Crimson:

Nancy Toff's letter or article about Housing was, I thought, a model of valid thinking.

A student tends to be with his classmates in many ways: on Freshman teams, in the less advanced courses, etc. The desirable objective is to give him the opportunity to mix with others also. The justly touted broadening effect of a Harvard education is in large part attributable to exposure. Segregation of any sort diminishes exposure and is therefore suspect.

A major justification for expensive athletic programs, in which I am engaged, is that they mix people through the common bond of a single pursuit, thus contributing markedly to exposure. The same concept applies to all extra-curricular activities. Should we have "Sophomore teams" as well as Freshman teams? The justification for Freshman teams is that they give opportunity to those not potentially good enough for the Varsity to get the fun and benefits of a team experience. After that there is the Junior Varsity--mixing three classes.

In the remote past (when I was a Freshman), before TV and other advanced communications, Freshmen as a group were often extremely naive, narrow and immature. Segregation gave misery its desired company in the adjustment process. Doubtless this is still a bit true, but most certainly it has diminished, so the question is not "Should we segregate Sophomores?" but "Should we reduce the segregation of Freshmen?"

Perhaps I just don't see the other side but segregating Sophomores as well as Freshmen would be, in my judgement, a truly regressive move. John M. Barnaby   Coach, Tennis and Squash