Despite its recent less-than-subtle advertising blitz, the Government department has found itself with a dramatically reduced number of concentrators as compared to recent years. This is part of a continuing trend in which it seems many undergraduates are opting to leave the social sciences in general for more diverse academic endeavors. Though a drop in raw numbers may be disappointing for the Gov department’s marketing crew, we believe that this reduced concentration size is a good thing. Traditionally, Government has ranked among the largest of concentrations on campus, consistently wooing hundreds of undergraduates into its folds. But whatever bragging rights these high numbers may warrant, this “bloated” department has been unusually disappointing to its students—owing in large part to the burdens imposed by excessive class size. As such, this year’s drop in sophomore declarations is actually a boon in terms of reducing the strain on departmental resources. Professors with fewer students will be able to facilitate more targeted and personal instruction. The advising network will be less taxed, allowing for more concrete and individually-tailored advice on how to navigate the concentration.

In addition, we welcome the move many students seem to be making toward other fields of interest. In the past, a large number of freshmen have opted to choose Government simply by default, because it was “the thing to do.” This mentality is reprehensible, as a reasoned and deliberate concentration choice is one of the most important decisions a Harvard undergrad will make. The reduction in Government concentrators can be seen, in part, as a welcome change in behavior: With more time to choose a field, students are tailoring their academic decisions to their particular interests and the quality of the department.

With the release of the new numbers of Government concentrators, the department has an incredible opportunity to re-focus its goals on the quality of the undergraduate experience. Now more than ever, the powers that be in CGIS need to re-evaluate the department’s quality and reputation. Its myriad resources, its new facilities, and its budgetary priorities should shift to issues most pertinent to its students: advising, pedagogy, and the quality of course offerings.

With a smaller number of concentrators to manage, more time must be devoted to the improvement of the department’s oft-bemoaned academic program—not simply an advertisement campaign to refill the ranks of concentrators. “The Government Department Wants YOU to be a Government concentrator!” states the ubiquitous poster representing the department’s extensive ad campaign. Well, what students want is not on a upsurge in numbers, but rather tangible and substantive improvements to the Government program itself.

As the Curricular Review attempts to revamp the entirety of undergraduate academics—from advising to general education—the Government department should take note of its students too, turning its attention toward the academic and intellectual development of its constituency, no matter how big or small it is.