Inevitably, many of us will one day become alumni ourselves, whose votes will elect future Board members. Prior to graduation, we should seek a better understanding of the Board of Overseers both to improve its current function and to protect our future voices and votes.
Schools that are too trigger-happy with bans on AI will run the risk of placing their students at a serious educational and competitive disadvantage, particularly relative to other countries that may be more receptive to AI than our own. Education must prepare young people for the future — and the future seems to involve a great deal of ChatGPT.
For the second semester in a row, alleged abuser Professor John L. Comaroff is back in the classroom, while students chant in unison, fervently hoping that their voices — loud as ever — might just induce the administration to act. In the long fight against this alleged abuser, we must all continue to beat the drum until justice is won.
The best apology Harvard can give Kenneth Roth is its improvement. We hope it will. We hope this incident will serve as an opportunity for Harvard to boldly and ambitiously double down on its commitment to academic freedom in hiring University-wide.
Starting July 2023, a Black woman will proudly claim Harvard’s highest office — becoming the first Black president and president of color in the history of the University. Her impending tenure provides an unprecedented, deeply resonant model of leadership for millions across the country and the globe; we hope its effect will be equally transformative in sparking change.
A future that begins not with a boot forever stamping on a human face — but with a protest, a vote, or a whisper that asks, in brave, unflinching terms, whether you hear the people sing.
A few thousand dollars for a single language program may seem small. But properly nurtured, this spark could ignite significant DEI changes at Harvard.
In a world driven by numbers, we should strive to limit the influence of abstract rankings and begin to prioritize our own happiness. Following in the footsteps of HLS, we must break ranks.
The past four years have been among the most turbulent in modern American political history. The midterm election results may show the beginnings of a return to sanity.
We are saddened to see hateful groups come to the place that we call home, but we can no longer treat these events like one-off incidents. White supremacy is still marching across our country and we must be ready to fight it. Although hate has come to our home, it is our duty to make sure it finds no home here.
In the short run, students can only attempt to collectively resist our cut-throat cultural impulses. Confront failure in your own life; a failure to do so will make the eventual, inescapable reckoning with your imperfections (we all have them!) much more bitter. We must give ourselves grace, but in turn, allow ourselves to take risks — just not when it comes to academic honesty.
If Harvard’s logic continues to assert that everything is fine unless students explicitly reach out for help, then on paper, this campus may not experience any mental health struggles at all — a crude calculation of liability with the potential to be dangerous.
Harvard was a leader in combating the pandemic proper. Now, we must lead in healing the scars it's left behind. Harvard can help save a generation from learning loss, and it has a duty to try.
In the wake of the oral arguments of the Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard trial, The Crimson’s Editorial Board asked its editors and the broader Harvard community to reflect on what affirmative action means to them, and the impact that the initiative’s looming downfall could have on our campus.
The collapse of affirmative action must be met with righteous anger and a renewed commitment to diversity — not with an empty, subdued shrug.
On the very eve of the Students for Fair Admissions Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College trial, we asked our Editorial editors to reflect on what affirmative action means to them, and the impact that the initiative’s downfall could have on Harvard.
Our democracy cannot survive without free speech and the free press. The events of last spring and this past month show us, vividly, that we cannot have either without the unequivocal protection of speakers. The pursuit of the truth through journalism is the sole, brilliant north star of this Editorial Board. And, come what may, we stand unwavering, uncowed, and unbroken in support of it — in Cambridge, in Wellesley, in Palestine, and everywhere.
While I wish we had never published our BDS editorial last semester, I will forever defend my peers’ right to publish their views. I just wish they would extend the same courtesy to their critics.
If passed, Ballot Question Three could be a win for packies over big corporations (albeit one born out of compromise!) and those in favor of a more safe and more fun nightlife involving responsible alcohol consumption. Our state can do better than second-to-Utah; our local stores deserve protection and our consumers deserve the ability to buy low-grade alcohol at more locations.