Poor Mika. Mika Kasumov ’09 is a freshman from Azerbaijan, and no one seems to understand what that means.

“Is it a city?” “Oh, that’s like India, right?” “Is that in the U.S.?”

As a plague of geographic ignorance continues to grip the nation (only one in seven Americans can find Iraq on a map), the puzzled responses Mika has heard since he arrived in the fall testify to a disturbing reality: Harvard is not immune.

Harvard is, however, self-aware. Conversations with a number of peers have revealed a deep and pervasive sense of insecurity about geography. More interestingly, perhaps, Harvard undergraduates seem genuinely eager to change what they view as an unacceptable dearth of geographic knowledge. And, as the tide of globalization advances ever further, ignorance becomes ever more costly.

But what does it mean, exactly, to study geography? For many people, the word conjures unpleasant memories of fourth grade state capital exams. Geography, however, is about much more than just memorizing locations and place names (although that’s a good start). It goes beyond content to give people skills necessary for a sophisticated understanding of the social sciences and current events.

The roles of ethnic minorities, the dynamics of ongoing border disputes, the strategic positions of key waterways: concepts like these are fundamental to developing a mature perspective on global affairs. Without a strong core of geographic knowledge, analyzes of international events tend to be myopic at best and provincial at worst.

Yet Harvard’s course catalog continues to feature a grand total of zero courses in the subject. If Harvard is to have any sort of meaningful core curriculum—one which must aim to create informed, global citizens—then the inclusion of a survey course in world geography is absolutely essential.

Take Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service, for example. All freshmen must either pass a very difficult placement exam or take the pass-fail introductory geography course, “Map of the Modern World.” While this particular system might not be the best fit for Harvard, it sends a clear message that we should seek to echo: Our institution will not graduate people unfit to engage actively with the world around them.

Why aren’t we sending that message now? We can thank former University President James B. Conant ’13, who justified his decision to scrap the Geography Department in 1948 with the famous line: “Geography is not a University subject.” Other American universities took heed, and within a short period of time, geography departments all over the U.S. found themselves disbanded or ignored.

Conant was wrong. If Harvard considers it important for students to be familiar with the basics of the human genome, or with methods of literary interpretation, then surely the ability to analyze global events in a rigorous and meaningful way ranks as a similarly critical skill.

It’s time, at long last, for an introductory course in geography. It doesn’t matter whether this course is in the Core, general education curriculum, or a different category altogether. What does matter is that as many students as possible enroll. If we want students prepared to approach the complexities of the world, then they need to share a certain basic level of competence in geography. The College must finally give geography the place it deserves in our course catalog.



Andrew C. Miller ’09, an editorial comper, lives in Matthews hall.