Summers declined to comment on his involvement in the committee, saying only that he hoped for the group to further develop a system that could effectively replace the Core.

Pinker says that Summers also played a role in helping Kirby call upon some of the most well regarded members of the faculty to take part in this reevaluation. In addition to Kirshner, Kirby also asked Professor of English Louis Menand, Pinker, Bass Professor of Government Michael J. Sandel and Professor of Romance Languages and Literature Diana Sorensen, who co-chaired the working group on concentrations last year.

A RUBBER STAMP?

Summers and his committee are aiming to issue a new round of recommendations to the Faculty next semester. But it is unclear how their proposals will differ from those presented last spring.

Kirshner, who called the year-end report helpful if not completely definitive, said his colleagues did not want to simply apply a “rubber stamp” to the previous group’s work or approve measures without first considering them for themselves.

“People are just too busy for that,” he says. “I don’t think it’s just self-pride. If you ask people to help out, they’re going to want to think about it. You have to get to the beginning before you can make progress.”

Last spring Kirby said this committee would consider how best to implement the report’s recommendation that Harvard establish a distributional requirement supplemented by broad “foundational and integrational” classes called the Harvard College Courses. Students would be required to take an as yet undetermined number of courses in each of the following areas: the social sciences, life sciences, physical and engineering sciences, and humanities, as well as a general studies division, which would include a focus on international studies. Harvard College Courses would be one way to fulfil the distribution requirement.

Faculty members were quick to criticize the report after its publication. At a May 18 meeting, professors said the recommendations were too vague and disjointed, lacking a clear ideological direction.

At the time, Professor of Slavic Languages and Literatures Julie A. Buckler told the Faculty that while she “appreciate[s] the report’s broad contours...it still remains to develop a guiding vision.”

With the faculty’s criticisms in mind, Kirshner says the new general education team has decided to establish a firm philosophical consensus before they move on to more pointed discussion. And because Sandel is the only one in their midst who was involved in last year’s work, they must trudge through familiar territory before proceeding, he adds.

—Staff writer Leon Neyfakh can be reached at neyfakh@fas.harvard.edu.