Document 25

January 26, 1998

Anne Taylor, Vice President and General Counsel
Harvard University
Massachusetts Hall
Cambridge, MA 02138

RE: Peter Berkowitz

Dear Anne:

       I am pleased that we were able to chat last week and I look forward to meeting with you on the 30th to further discuss this matter.

       I thought I might help focus our discussions this week by sharing my concerns about the tenure process generally and, more specifically, your review of this matter.

       First, I have a general concern regarding the nature and scope of confidentiality in the process. Does Harvard have a specific rule of confidentiality that can help us understand exactly what is and what is not confidential? If so, where can I find it? I can understand, for example, the need to protect the identity of committee members or persons who write letters in support of or critical of a candidate. On the other hand, it is not immediately apparent why the content of such letters or the age, status and general qualifications of committee members ought not be available so long as their identify is not compromised.

       Second, I would be interested in the nature, scope and content of your inquiry. Your review led you to conclude that there was no evidence of a denial of due process and no evidence of hostility, bias or conflict of interest and, therefore, no basis for recommending that the Joint Committee on Appointments reconsider Peter's case. I would not expect you to provide details of your fact finding in your letter to me, but I do think that Peter and I are entitled to know the fact finding process you went through -- with whom you spoke, what was reported to you, etc. -- so that we are satisfied (not unlike a litigant in the appellate process) that your inquiry was a thorough and objective one and that your conclusion that the procedures were fully complied with was justified by the record you created.

	Very truly yours,
	Matthew H. Feinberg

MHF/rg

cc: Peter Berkowitz, Ph.D.