Sandra Y.L. Korn
I’m sure that all of these proposals reflect well-developed and thoughtful plans on the part of Harvard University. But in my four years here, the rigidity of Harvard’s furniture has never seemed a major roadblock to my learning experience. In fact, I have had little to no interaction with technology in the classroom.
Harvard could continue to cut corners, sacrificing native forests, subsistence farmers’ land, and ecological well-being in its efforts to turn a profit. Or, it could use its timberland assets to push forward a sustainable model for global forestry. I hope Harvard takes seriously its “commitment to sustainable investment” and that its “distinctive responsibilities to society” lead it to responsible ownership.
What would happen if students who dislike their House simply moved out?
While Harvard may be overtaken with financial considerations, the university’s main purpose is the pursuit of knowledge. Dean Pfister’s engagement with students’ social and academic lives should not be exceptional.
Discourse about “academic freedom” obscures what should fundamentally be a political argument.
Institutions and their rules take a long time to change, and it will be generations more before Harvard has shaken off all the remnants of many centuries of patriarchy.
But it has become increasingly clear to anyone who thinks critically about teaching that there’s something off with TFA’s model.
As Harvard moves forward with its plans to build, among other things, a hotel and conference center in North Allston, it has the responsibility to bring good jobs to the Allston community.
Final clubs have been lambasted by some activists and journalists for their reputation as sites of sexual assault
CAMBRIDGE, England—This pub is called Revolution and although it’s a Thursday night and there’s a five pound cover, the July 4th crowd is teeming with both Americans and Brits. I’m sitting on the roof deck and talking to two youngish guys from the town of Cambridge, UK.
Harvard is not used to settling for 75th percentile. For better or for worse, HUCTW showed a lot of respect for Harvard when it agreed that workers would take a lower wage increase during the recession to offset the hit Harvard took in the financial crisis. Harvard should show its workers the same respect—and stop arguing that the 75th percentile is acceptable for clerical workers.
Creating a social choice fund that exists outside of the endowment is an important first step.
President Faust and the Harvard Gazette seem intent on introducing Harvard’s undergraduates to the military by framing ROTC—and the military—in a uniformly positive light.
Efficiency comes at another price: workers become dispensable, interchangeable, and alienated from their work.
If Harvard’s administrators are committed to increasing the number of working-class and middle-class students at Harvard, they must address the structural roots of educational inequality.