Leah F. Kaplan '02 decided to come to Harvard for a variety of reasons, but the science classes were not among them. In fact, she says, had there been a tougher science or math requirement, she might not have come to Harvard at all.

"If there were an equal requirement for science as there is for humanities," she says, " Harvard would not have been the obvious choice that it was for me."

Since the 1970s, when Harvard did away with the General Education requirements and replaced them with a Core curriculum, there has been an ongoing debate about both the quality and the quantity of required science and math education.

And with two policy changes going into effect next fall, the College is turning its attention towards strengthening the place of math and sciences in the Core.

Weak at the Core?

Since the Core replaced the General Education breadth requirements in the 1970s under then dean of the Faculty Henry Rosovsky, the curriculum has come under fire for giving insufficient attention to math and the natural sciences.

"Before the Core, General Ed required two courses in humanities, two social sciences, and two in the sciences. [Natural science] was one third and now it's one fourth of the Core," says Cabot Professor of the Natural Sciences John E. Dowling '57 who was on the CRC. "This has made a number of people say we've shortchanged science."

In 1997, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) set up a Core Review Committee (CRC) to examine the curriculum and suggest how it might be improved. Composed of six professors and two students, the CRC produced a working paper that was released in March of that year and included significant discussion of Core science requirements.

Pforzheimer University Professor, and Chair of the CRC, Sidney Verba '53 says that though it is difficult to know "how much is enough," certainly no one on the CRC would have objected to more science in the Core.