Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line


At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions


Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists


‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam


‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6

Faculty Will Vote on New Procedures for Discipline

By Garrett Epps

Dean Dunlop told the Faculty yesterday that the Administration has identified four students as having disrupted the pro-war "Counter Teach-in" in Sanders Theatre March 26.

Dunlop also said that the Administration has prepared a 15-minute color film record of the disruption, which is available to Faculty and student groups who wish to view it. Groups wishing the video tape should ask for it through Dean May's office, Dunlop said.

Dunlop's remarks constituted a brief report on the Sanders Theatre incident at the beginning of yesterday's regular Faculty meeting.

The main business of the meeting was to approve for submission to the full Faculty by mail ballot a proposal for the Governance Committee for University-wide procedures for disciplining Faculty members. The proposal was approved 137 to 4.

Mail ballots will be sent to every member of the Faculty early next week.

The small opposition came from an odd coalition: among the four voting against were Donald G.M. Anderson, chairman of the Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (CRR), and Hilary Putnam, a member of the Progressive Labor Party (PLP).

The procedures approved-which have already been approved by the Business and Medicine Faculties-provide for a two-part procedure to judge faculty members accused of violating the third paragraph of the Resolution of Rights and Responsibilities, which forbids any infringement of academic freedom, freedom of speech and movement, and freedom from force or violence, or of the Third Statute of the University, which forbids "gross misconduct or neglect of duty."

Screening Committee

Complaints against any member of any faculty-which may be brought by any member of the University-will be investigated by a screening committee set up by his faculty. If the screening committee upholds the complaint, the faculty member will thenbe judged by a seven-member hearing panel, consisting of four members of his faculty and three from other faculties in the University.

In addition, the measure approved yesterday would allow two members of the Corporation to participate in the hearings without voting.

The hearing commission will make its recommendation to the President. If he decides to overrule the recommendation, he will submit his reasons to the hearing committee, which will then rehear the case. Final power, however, still rests with the President and the Corporation.

Anderson-a member of the Governance Committee, which drew up the recommendations-offered an amendment to the proposal which would have asked the Governance Committee to make the composition of the hearing committees more proportional to the differences in size between the faculties-thus giving the Faculties of Arts and Sciences, Law, Business, and Medicine more voice in discipline than the Education, Divinity, Dental, Public Health, and other small faculties.

When his proposal was defeated 104-11-thus failing to get even the one-fifth vote required to place it on the mail ballot as a possible amendment-he voted against the proposal.

Putnam urged the Faculty to vote against the proposal because, he said, it is "an attempt to stampede the Faculty into a mood of repression to purge the Faculty of me and those who think like me." Putnam had earlier charged that the Administration was seeking to oust him because he was a member of the Progressive Labor Party.

More on Film

May said last night that the film of the disruption had been purchased from a commercial news agency "which might not want its name mentioned." He also said the film produced by the two film crews hired by Harvard had proved "not very useful" because "there wasn't much of them and they were of the wrong thing." The Harvard films had focused on the speakers on the platform rather than on the audience, he said.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.