Cambridge Residents Slam Council Proposal to Delay Bike Lane Construction


‘Gender-Affirming Slay Fest’: Harvard College QSA Hosts Annual Queer Prom


‘Not Being Nerds’: Harvard Students Dance to Tinashe at Yardfest


Wrongful Death Trial Against CAMHS Employee Over 2015 Student Suicide To Begin Tuesday


Cornel West, Harvard Affiliates Call for University to Divest from ‘Israeli Apartheid’ at Rally



Since President Lowell introduced the House system to Harvard in the late 1920's, there has been very little change in the basic make-up of the Houses. Now, in 1957, with eighth, ninth and tenth Houses soon to become realities the possibility of some alteration in the system is worth consideration.

It has long been the hope of University officials that the Houses be the intellectual centers of the community, but over the past 25 years they have certainly not measured up to these expectations. Perhaps the inclusion of graduate students from various areas of academic interest might stimulate a more intellectually active House. Also, a greater attempt to make use of course sections in the House might be made, especially as new construction eases the present overcrowded situation.

Finally, and perhaps most important, the requirement that all students must spend their three upperclass years in a House should be considered. There are some people to whom the life in a House means very little. It is ridiculous to force such a system on an undergraduate, especially while there are other students who want to live in a House but, because of crowded conditions, are unable to do so and must commute. It is likely that these students who wish to live outside the House would constitute a rather small percent of each class, and their leaving would not jeopardize the entire system. The University might restrict the right to leave a House to seniors or specially qualified members of the other classes, and then determine whether or not the privilege should be further extended.

The important thing, however, is not the rejection or acceptance of any of these suggestions, but rather a careful examination of the ends and means of the House system in the 1950's without being overly awed by the founding principles layed down in the 1920's.

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