Harvard’s Institute of Politics Ends Off-Campus Retreats, Plans Staff-Led Trainings

The Institute of Politics’ Student Advisory Committee will replace off-campus retreats with on-campus, staff-led leadership development days in future semesters, according to an internal announcement to student leaders last Tuesday.

The change comes nearly three weeks after The Crimson reported allegations of hazing during a February retreat and a series of student leadership resignations. Several students also raised concerns about how IOP staff addressed complaints about the committee’s culture.

In an internal email to SAC leadership obtained by The Crimson, IOP President Lorenzo Z. Ruiz ’27 outlined plans for the new leadership development days.

“These will be opportunities for new and returning SAC members to set group norms, learn about best practices for handling membership concerns, and refresh skills in communication and conflict resolution,” Ruiz wrote in his weekly SAC meeting recap to the 37-member committee.

Ruiz also announced plans to expand tailored training opportunities with the Dean of Students Office, which would include “anti-hazing training” for SAC leaders developed in partnership with IOP staff. He also wrote that staff would be “reviewing communications practices internally.”

Allegations of hazing during the IOP’s February retreat became a central point of tension among student leaders and staff in the months following the gathering. Then-freshman Connor S. Chaffin ’29 described “inappropriate” conduct and risks of “social ostracization” associated with the retreat activities, while other members described the games as lighthearted and “entirely optional”.

In a statement to The Crimson in September, IOP spokesperson Brigid O’Rourke wrote that students had previously “raised broader concerns about student leadership and student culture within the IOP,” but that no hazing allegations had been brought to staff.

That account contrasted with statements from Communications Director Dhara N. Patel ’27 and Former Director of Internal Affairs Cole W. Hahn ‘27, who said they had raised concerns with IOP staff about the treatment of freshman members. Hahn said he spoke “extensively” with staff about Chaffin’s experience and that staff were aware of hazing concerns.

Hahn, Chaffin, and two other SAC members later resigned from the committee for varying reasons.

Ruiz’s email also outlined several changes to SAC communication practices and meeting norms. Ruiz invited all SAC members to a ‘Community Working Group’ to discuss community norms and announced an anonymous feedback process facilitated by staff ahead of the SAC leadership transition in November.

The format of weekly SAC meetings will also be revised for the remainder of Ruiz’s tenure to encourage greater participation from members. The change follows criticism from SAC members Rhea P. Maniar ’28 and Allison R. McGourty ’29, along with five others, who raised concerns about unequal treatment of members by the executive team.

“Our SAC meeting format is being adjusted to accommodate more discussion and collaboration, and I will be sending agendas in advance of meetings for members to help shape conversation,” Ruiz wrote.

Asked what prompted the policy changes, O’Rourke and Ruiz declined to elaborate.

“The IOP is focused on preparing our next generation of student leaders. We’re proud of our collaborative, student-led process,” Ruiz wrote in a statement.

Ruiz closed his email by emphasizing that the changes were not final.

“This list is by no means exhaustive, but hopefully offers a launching point for our work together and for SACs to come,” Ruiz stated.

—Staff writer Jen L. Phan can be reached at [email protected] and Signal at jenphan.74. Follow her on X at @jenllphan.

—Staff writer Mirei S. Saneyoshi can be reached at [email protected] and Signal at mireisaneyoshi.09. Follow her on X at @mireisaneyoshi.