Undergraduates Celebrate Second Consecutive Virtual Housing Day
Dean of Students Office Discusses Housing Day, Anti-Racism Goals
Renowned Cardiologist and Nobel Peace Prize Winner Bernard Lown Dies at 99
Native American Nonprofit Accuses Harvard of Violating Federal Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
U.S. Reps Assess Biden’s Progress on Immigration at HKS Event
Before the flurry of Divisional Examinations has been completely smoothed out, the Economics Department deserves hearty congratulation upon the skillful job which it displayed in making up the Junior Departmental. Undergraduate approval of this fair examination has been universal, and rightly so. The Department has made a wise choice in selecting its test designers.
As long as modern college methods call for strenuous emphasis upon examinations as a means of estimating the progress of undergraduates in their fields, the phrasing and selection of questions will stand out as one of the most essential administrative tasks. That Harvard's examiners have sometimes slipped up in manufacturing their working tools is not to be questioned. The ambiguity of the Money and Banking section of the Junior Economics paper of last year is only a case in point.
Partly because of this sharp contrast between two examinations covering the same material, the improvement in the Economics Department has been greatly appreciated. Recognition of the change is significant, and other departments will do well to take notice. After three or four years of preparation for a real test of their knowledge of a field of concentration, students have every right to expect a fair try, and if the axe is to cut off their beads, they are entitled to a flawless edge.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.