For a university that seeks to become a global leader in education, Harvard has kept its student body disappointingly close to home. The number of College students who choose to experience study abroad is painfully low. Each year about 160 undergraduates out of 6,600 participate in out-of-residence academic programs—a number that seems even smaller when compared to colleges like Dartmouth, which has only two-thirds as many students but more than four times as many studying abroad. Although Dartmouth’s high numbers may be explained in part by the peculiarities of its calendar, Harvard clearly has far to go in giving its students adequate opportunities for study abroad.

Fortunately, however, momentum seems to be building for reforms that would allow more students to gain the perspective that comes with learning and living in a different culture. At the end of last semester, the Faculty commissioned a report on the state of study abroad. Dean of Undergraduate Education Susan G. Pedersen ’81-’82, who made study abroad a priority last spring, raised the issue again at the first Faculty meeting held last month. Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis ’68 praised study abroad programs at last week’s Undergraduate Council meeting. And President Lawrence H. Summers has actively encouraged the Faculty to pursue a greater balance between requirements and flexibility in study abroad programs. We are glad to see new attention devoted to promoting study abroad programs, and we hope that the current momentum translates into real reform.

The enthusiasm for study abroad comes at the same time as a severe housing shortage. Indeed, Lewis noted to council members that “the best overflow housing is in Budapest and Thailand.” Encouraging more students to study abroad naturally means that fewer students will live on campus each year. But Lewis and other administrators are right to recognize that the current housing crunch should not be the primary motive behind the push to improve study abroad. Regardless of the housing situation, we feel that study in a foreign culture is in itself good for a student’s education and that the College should pursue it even after concerns such as the housing crunch are alleviated.

But students cannot take advantage of opportunities abroad without significant change by the College. Currently, students who plan to study abroad must make arrangements with the Office of Career Services (OCS), the Standing Committee on Study Out of Residence, their concentration tutorial office and senior tutor, the Core office and the University Housing Office before obtaining approval for a petition to study abroad.

This annoyingly intricate process is made even more difficult by the fact that Harvard does not offer its own study abroad programs. Although students choose among an immense variety of programs worldwide, this seemingly limitless choice is misleading: OCS maintains a list of external programs that have received credit in the past, but there is no guarantee that students who pursue those programs will receive credit again.

As a result, students must apply to both the study abroad program for acceptance and to Harvard for approval, making it difficult to know in advance whether a particular program will be accepted for credit. This uncertainty limits the number of students who choose to study abroad, meaning that the catalogue of previously approved programs is even more limited. The College should reevaluate its current approval process, with the goal of increasing the number of students each year who find meaningful foreign study.

Students who wish to study abroad also encounter obstacles in receiving Core, concentration or tutorial credit for their academic experience. It is unduly difficult to fulfill even the most reasonable of Core requirements through foreign study. The Foreign Cultures requirement, for example, may not be fulfilled by any individual course abroad, but only by an entire program of study that combines a study of a foreign language with courses in the humanities. Core credit for study abroad in other fields is infrequently awarded, and approval for concentration and tutorial credit is at the discretion of often reluctant departments. Even when a student is granted credit for his or her academic work abroad, the current system also often penalizes a student by taking away the ability to receive credit for independent study courses.

We applaud the history department’s recent decision to make concentration credit easier to receive, and we hope other departments will follow suit. The University should recognize these problems and work to create an organized process for granting appropriate credit for academic work completed out of residence.

We applaud the current push to improve study abroad at Harvard, and we hope that the meetings among faculty, administrators and students result in changes to the current study abroad system. As these reforms are implemented, opportunities for foreign study must also be heavily marketed to first-years, who have enough time to plan ahead and to take advantage of the unique experiences to be found abroad. Improved study abroad programs will allow a great number of students to experience the world outside of Harvard, and to obtain the broad education that a global university should provide.