Harris said this was inevitable, given the setup of the review.
“The reality is, that it seems to me if you look at the different committees, it seems like in every issue, you could say, ‘that was discussed mostly in committee X,’” he said. “Both the concentrations committee and our committee dealt with concentration choice timing. Invariably, we discussed some things they didn’t and vice versa.”
Moreover, committee members said that the review’s lack of formal avenues for communication, means that there are issues in the report that many had little chance to weigh-in on.
“I think one of problems with the report was there was not really a real opportunity for Faculty and even committee members to come in at an earlier stage,” Feldman said. “Many of these ideas, they really haven’t had a chance to comment on.”
And the review now faces a new procedural difficulty—gathering responses to the recommendations from the Harvard community.
“I know that the hope is to finish it up in a year,” Feldman said. “It may take longer than that. People need to remember [that] we only effectively have eight full Faculty meetings a year. The amount of time scheduled for Faculty consideration is not that large for a report this broad.”
—Staff writer Laura L. Krug can be reached at krug@fas.harvard.edu.