Harvard relies on America’s “fundamental values of freedom and equality,” Lewis said in his speech.
“It seems to me that in this free society, we should want to teach young minds how to learn, but also to inspire their souls to grasp and to sustain the best humane ideals that our shared heritage has given us,” Lewis said.
Lewis has noted that the last two major curricular reviews have moved in somewhat different directions on the issue of America’s place in the world.
Changes made after World War II were based on ideas laid out in the Faculty-produced book, General Education in a Free Society, known as the “Red Book,” Lewis said.
“The basic premise,” Lewis wrote in The Crimson, “was that civilization had almost been extinguished, and it was a responsibility of American higher education to ensure that the students it was educating would not let the same thing happen again.”
At Morning Prayers, Lewis called the book “mainly Western in perspective” but “not jingoistic” and “not even about teaching patriotism.” He said the book instilled a sense of respect for the ideal of freedom.
Lewis contrasted the Core Curriculum—introduced in the 1970s in part to introduce students to other cultures—with the Red Book, saying the Core “had no particular motivating philosophy” other than to cultivate the importance of learning in general.
A Different Perspective
Lewis’ introduction of American values into a debate that has hardly begun contrasts sharply with the themes emphasized by Summers and Kirby.
“A century ago, Harvard was becoming a national university. Today, while strongly rooted in American traditions and values, it is becoming a global university,” Summers said last year in his installation address. “Our goal will be to extend excellence without ever diluting it.”
Kirby, a scholar of modern Chinese history, has made international studies one of his top priorities. After co-authoring a report last year recommending that undergraduate study abroad be reformed and expanded, Kirby’s first major move as dean this summer was to place the Study Abroad Office directly under the jurisdiction of the dean of undergraduate education.
Kirby did not respond to requests for comment this week.
Though Lewis has no formal role as dean of the College to play in the upcoming curricular review and generally defers to the dean of the Faculty on academic matters, he has in the past spoken out on certain Faculty-wide issues.
He has been vocal, for example, on the issue of improving advising for undergraduates, often castigating some of the larger departments for their poor ratings from students.
On the issue of grade inflation, Lewis engaged in a protracted debate with Mansfield over the sources of higher grades.
Colleagues say that compared to past deans of the College, Lewis enjoys an unusual amount of influence among faculty because of his reputation as an academic.
Lewis, who sits on the Educational Policy Committee and the Core Standing Committee, was a tenured computer science professor long before he became dean.
“The previous deans...were highly respected by the Faculty, but coming up through the administrative route you just don’t have the same oomph,” says former Lowell House Master William H. Bossert ’59.
—Staff writer William M. Rasmussen can be reached at wrasmuss@fas.harvard.edu.