News

Cambridge Residents Slam Council Proposal to Delay Bike Lane Construction

News

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

News

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

News

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

News

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

Faculty Vote on Gen Ed Nears

Implementation of Gen Ed Report will distinguish it from the Core, profs say

By Lois E. Beckett, Crimson Staff Writer

A vote on the Harvard’s new plan for General Education may be nearing, but professors say it’s too soon to tell how the reforms will change the experience of students and teachers in Harvard Yard.

The Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) is slated to discuss the final report of the Task Force on General Education at its meeting this afternoon, and Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles has said a vote on the report may come as soon as March.

Many professors expressed support for the final report’s real-world rationale and praised the Task Force for responding to criticisms of earlier drafts.

“I think they have done an excellent job of incorporating many of the concerns the Faculty brought to their attention,” said Mary Lewis, the Loeb Associate Professor in the Social Sciences.

Lewis is a member of the Faculty Council, the 19-member governing body of the Faculty.

But in interviews this week, many professors were already looking ahead to the next stage of curricular reform.

They emphasized that it is ultimately the report’s implementation that will determine how the future of general education will differ from the current Core Curriculum.

“The proof is really in the pudding—it’s in the courses that are going to be taught,” Arthur Kleinman, chair of the Anthropology department, said.

The success of reforms will come down to individual faculty members’ willingness to develop new courses focused on the real-world applications of knowledge, professors said.

“If people can rev up a whole lot of steam and enthusiasm, we’ll get a lot of new courses. If people say, ‘I’m tired of thinking about this, I don’t have time,’ we won’t,” Jayne Professor of Government Jennifer L. Hochschild said.

But professors will have plenty of incentive to create new courses, according to Andrew D. Gordon ’74, the chair of the History department.

“Why rob a bank? That’s where the money is. Why generate a new Gen Ed course? That’s where the students are,” Gordon said.

Kleinman and Hochschild said the committee charged with implementing the reforms will also have a crucial impact on the new shape of a Harvard education.

The specific guidelines they develop for the general education course categories will be especially important, Hochschild said.

“If the gateway is too narrow, there won’t be good courses offered, but if the gateway is too wide, there will be the same old courses with new titles and new introductory lectures,” she said.

As general education moves forward, the ball is very much in the Faculty’s court—but the leadership of both the Faculty and the review is now an open question.

President-elect Drew Gilpin Faust served on the Committee on General Education that produced a fall 2005 report that was widely criticized for lacking a guiding vision.

As president, Faust has promised to “back off” from the curricular review.

“It’s the Faculty’s business,” Faust said in an interview Sunday, adding, “I think it will be their decision and their involvement which will make it come to the best outcome.”

Interim Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles is set to retire after this year, and Faust has yet to appoint his successor.

But in an interview last week, Task Force co-chair Alison Simmons, a philosophy professor, emphasized the importance of administrative backing for the reforms.

“I do think it’s important that the administration put its money where its mouth is and support a new curriculum,” Simmons said. “It’s going to take money for course development, for innovative course techniques.”

Plummer Professor of Christian Morals Peter J. Gomes echoed the importance of cold cash in making curricular dreams come true.

“Jeremy Knowles would like to be able to say, ‘We have a great new curriculum, and it doesn’t cost a penny,’” Gomes said.

But, Gomes said, the reform will doubtless require significant funding.

“Curricula and [capital] campaigns go together hand in hand, like wars and religion,” Gomes said.

—Johannah S. Cornblatt, Carolyn F. Gaebler, and Clifford M. Marks contributed to the reporting of this story.

—Staff writer Lois E. Beckett can be reached at lbeckett@fas.harvard.edu.

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

Tags