The group is studying different curricular models, with options such as minor fields of study, clusters—subjects outside of students’ area of concentration that might not fit into a particular department—and large core courses dubbed “supercourses” that would provide every student with a common background.

The committee on concentrations concluded the presentations. Co-chair Diana Sorensen said her group is considering the timing of concentration declaration.

“We are looking at how to give students the ability to explore areas of the curriculum whilst remaining conscious of the concerns of the faculty,” she said, “especially of the science faculty, who believe in the benefits of an early decision.”

The concentrations committee is also examining different kinds of “capstone experiences” or culminating academic experiences that would occur within a student’s field of specialty.

The lengthy presentations did not leave much time for Faculty discussion, though several members of the Faculty did put forth thoughts on what they had heard.

In addition to Gomes and Mansfield, Professor of Comparative Religion and Indian Studies Diana L. Eck spoke about what she called a “crisis in the humanities.”

“I feel that some of the deepest crises that we face as a human community have to do with humanist investigations,” she said, adding that she saw a dearth of research in the humanities. “The need for research in the humanities is as deeply urgent as the need for scientific research.”

Expanded science research, particularly in the biomedical fields, is an oft-stated University priority for the coming decades.

Martin said she was pleased with the way the meeting went, despite the lack of time for discussion.

“We presented a lot of information and I think we just wanted to let the Faculty and everybody else know what we were working on,” she said in an interview after the meeting.

—Staff writer Laura L. Krug can be reached at krug@fas.harvard.edu.