At least four Harvard departments have examined their grad programs in the last year and found them wanting, or at least in need of updating. The most dramatic change was in the Government Department, where a two-year student-faculty study led to a large-scale de-specialization this summer. New grad students in the department must choose among four basic fields of study--international relations, comparative government. American government, and political philosophy. "It was possible for people to take the Ph.D. in areas that were too specialized. But today they don't have the luxury of teaching in disparate fields, especially at small colleges," says Professor of Government Morris P. Fiorina, the department's graduate student advisor.
The Economics Department also changed its graduate program last year, implementing in the fall of 1983 a "modular" approach to the first year econometrics and economic theory classes. Spence, who served as chairman of the Ec Department last year, was reportedly instrumental in the transition to the new program. Other reforms include a mandatory first-year statistics class and an optional two-week pre-registration math seminar.
The back-to-basics moves in these departments--and the reform of grad programs in the History and English Departments and elsewhere--may portend a trend. "There's a cycle to these things not unlike the cycle of general education," says Phyllis C. Keller, associate dean for academic planning. "The last round of revisions ... was in the mid to late 60s, when the size of the graduate programs reached their peak" and they could afford to specialize, Keller adds.
STUDENT ANOMIE
Fifteen years ago, the Wolff Committee report noted that "the gravest current problem in the Graduate School is the one summarized by the well-worn but convenient word 'morale.'... The themes of belittlement, isolation, and neglect ran contrapuntally through the chorus of complaint."
"I think morale is better than in 1969-70, but then it couldn't be much worse," says McKinney. "The psychological atmosphere is better now."
Others say these problems continue to exist, though not quite so "contrapuntally." For instance, an internal Government Department survey of current graduate students found that one third either had "Ambivalent/mixed feelings" or were "Sorry I came to Harvard." Ninety percent felt that the department offered too little guidance and/or counseling.
The GSAS is supposed to take up the slack. "There is a concern that graduate students get full, personal attention. It's tough being a graduate student, and I think people are becoming sensitive to those needs," says Nancy S. Reinhardt, assistant dean for student affairs and special students, whose office coordinates student services.
But it is unclear whether enough is being done, and the Graduate Student Council has been quite vocal in the past with its complaints about life in the GSAS. For instance, in the spring of 1983, 300 grad students petitioned the University to centralize the school's administrative offices along with a lounge, cafe, and word processing center.
"There's no community," says one grad student. "A large part of your waking hours are spent with the same people." Yet the lounge was opened in Lehman Hall rather than Byerly last fall (14 years after it was first proposed), the placement service was merged with OCS-OCL, and the housing office was just farmed out to the Lehman Hall basement.
A University Hall survey conducted last spring--another indication of the GSAS's coming into vogue--is expected to give a clue to how widespread the students' gripes are