Advertisement

Bok Leads Higher Education into Battle

Harvard and the Real World

Presidential election years sometimes spark renewed activism and idealism in the electorate. Nowhere is this more true than in the offices of some of Harvard's top administrators.

During the Reagan Administration, the once divine image of higher education has deteriorated rapidly. Consevative critics, led by Secretary of Education William J. Bennett, have attacked colleges and universities for their high costs, their poor teaching and their arrogance. The White House has followed word with deed by consistently proposing high cuts in higher education programs.

But in the last year, President Bok has led a remarkable effort to take the initiative for educational reform away from such critics. Last July, in a speech delivered before a national conference of more than 500 educators, Bok called for a new partnership between universities, government and industry.

Bok's speech marked a turning point in how higher education viewed its roles in society. He expressed a growing determination among universities to become involved as institutions in solving the nation's problems. Under his plan, Bok would use universities' expertise and resources to rebuild American economic competitiveness, foster equal opportunity for minorities, improve the quality of life and strengthen moral standards.

Harvard Leads an Activist Charge

Advertisement

Bok and Harvard have been instrumental in prodding the unwieldy higher education establishment into action. Sitting around at an NCAA presidents' conference several years ago, Bok became engrossed in a conversation with William C. Friday, President Emeritus of the University of North Carolina, about the roles universities could play in bettering society.

This fall, the talks reached their timely fruition in the publication of the controversial Friday Commission report. The commission, which included 31 of the nation's foremost leaders in higher education, industry and labor, expanded on Bok's ideas. Entitled "A Memorandum to the 41st President of the United States", the report called on the next president to restore the close partnership that once existed between the federal government and higher education.

The report also urged the future president to increase federal grants for student financial aid, provide incentives for research to help restore economic competitiveness and fund international studies programs.

Friday, Bok and the commission received nationwide attention, as educators emphasized that the report marked the first time higher education had become directly involved in a presidential election. The day of the report's release, commission officials briefed presidential candidate Sen. Paul Simon (D.-Ill.), a long-time supporter of education. Friday and other members also met with Vice President George Bush a few weeks ago, while President Bok will soon discuss the report with Democratic front-runner Michael S. Dukakis.

The report galvanized educators, who said it would put education on the forefront of every candidate's agenda. Harvard officials, especially Vice President for Government and Community Affairs John Shattuck, were instrumental in formulating, writing and publicizing the report.

Predictably, administration officials and many editorial writers blasted it, saying that it represented nothing new from the education establishment. William Kristol, Secretary Bennett's chief of staff and a former Kennedy School professor, denounced the report as a mere "wish list" that sought "more money to pay for more programs."

Kristol's criticism "misses the whole point and proves the validness of the document," Friday says. "It's not a partisan document, and we did not choose sides."

The purpose of the report was "to create a more positive attitude towards what needs to be done," Friday says. "We felt we were morally bound to speak out."

Spreading the Good News

While education has taken a back seat in previous election years to more traditional domestic issues, voter concern about potential economic decline, equal opportunity, and the quality of life have propelled it to the forefront of every candidate's agenda this year.

Advertisement