{shortcode-c8d1e0a85a1200239de25ffa479ed56cbab8e91f}

Harvard faculty members overwhelmingly applauded the Harvard Corporation’s Friday decision to promote Alan M. Garber ’76 from the University’s interim president to its permanent one, deeming him a steady leader capable of stabilizing a campus in crisis.

The faculty, among Garber’s most crucial constituencies, called the appointment wise and pragmatic and praised his ability to peacefully defuse the 20-day pro-Palestine encampment in Harvard Yard and his 12-year tenure as Harvard’s provost. Their responses suggest that if Garber’s primary goal is guiding Harvard out of the political spotlight, he will likely have the backing of an increasingly influential faculty.

The Crimson spoke with or obtained statements from 116 faculty members, 110 of whom backed Garber’s leadership and the Corporation’s choice.

The responses indicated widespread respect for Garber, who has experienced virtually every role that Harvard has to offer. After receiving his bachelor’s degree, master’s degree, and Ph.D. from the University, he went on to serve as one of its professors, its top academic officer, and, now, its president.

At the same time, the responses suggested a general weariness among faculty members after yet another tempestuous semester. A shared desire among many faculty members was for a return to normalcy — and a renewed focus on the University’s academic functions.

“We would be at a much better place if we were to focus on scholarship,” Astronomy professor Abraham “Avi” Loeb said. “That’s the strength of Harvard — bringing the best minds together and not necessarily the minds that think alike on political issues.”

Garber, many faculty said, would bring about that shift.

“I credit his leadership for threading the needle and bringing us to a much better place, where we can focus on the core institutional mission in the coming academic year,” Biology professor Benjamin L. de Bivort wrote in an email.

Still, the relationship between faculty and Garber’s administration was not without its bumps. During the encampment, widely viewed as a test of Garber’s leadership, some professors urged administrators to open dialogue with student activists and criticized what they saw as the administration’s refusal to engage with student demands. In one exchange, faculty members even laughed incredulously at a non-answer from interim Provost John F. Manning ’82 during a meeting of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.

But on the 20th day of the Harvard Yard encampment, Garber struck a deal with organizers, in a surprise agreement that allowed the encampment to end peacefully. The move largely satisfied faculty, who had almost uniformly urged against police involvement.

In an emailed statement, Mathematics postdoc Ashvin A. Swaminathan ’17 contrasted Garber’s response to student protests with the police crackdowns at dozens of other institutions.

“He is to be lauded for handling the recent spate of student protests with respect and grace, reaching a peaceful resolution with the protestors in a way that caused minimal disruption to university operations,” Swaminathan wrote. “By contrast, administrators at other universities antagonized protestors by failing to listen to them and by needlessly involving law enforcement.”

“He’s really kept the temperature down, as far as I can tell,” Harvard Medical School professor and two-time interim dean Barbara J. McNeil said in an interview.

{shortcode-13a01a810a35e0ce89b784860646b2e8adeaccfc}

But Garber’s handling of the encampment failed to mollify all faculty, some of whom felt he had promised leniency for graduating student protesters and backtracked on that commitment when the Harvard College Administrative Board moved to place 13 graduating students on probation or suspension, barring them from receiving their diplomas on time.

Though the Corporation ultimately, after a back-and-forth with the faculty, permitted 11 of the 13 to graduate, the episode left Garber with dwindling trust and support among student activists and their faculty allies.

“I would describe my enthusiasm for a continued Garber administration as neutral at best,” Sanskrit preceptor Patrick Cummins wrote in a statement.

“And it seems the Garber administration, which got us in such a mess last year and which will be here for the immediate years to come, hasn’t learn any good lessons from recent events when it comes to how to constructively engage with their employees and students,” he added, condemning Harvard’s newly announced campus use rules as too restrictive and “Orwellian.”

Garber’s ability to navigate public perceptions of Harvard may prove just as important as his ability to manage the actual situation on campus — especially as critics in Congress press forward with investigations of the University.

Since donors and politicians began clamoring for then-President Claudine Gay’s departure in the fall, many Harvard faculty have expressed alarm about outside political pressure on the University. Still, they said Garber has the poise and political acumen to shield Harvard from ongoing scrutiny from Washington.

Government professor Theda Skocpol praised Garber’s “firm hand” and said that, without flashiness, the interim president had calmed the controversy engulfing Harvard.

“Various colleagues can agree or disagree with this or that decision, but he has removed Harvard from being an open political football and reasserted core values about research, teaching, excellence,” Skocpol said.

Classics professor Gregory Nagy wrote in an email that he was “optimistic” about Garber’s presidency.

“He is seraphically patient—and diplomatic,” Nagy wrote. “His skills in diplomacy will I hope be a powerful antidote that will free us from the political toxicity that had led, unjustly, I think, to the resignation of his predecessor.”

In naming Garber Harvard’s 31st president, the Corporation left him with an unusual three-year limit.

Though his term will be short, Garber faces no shortage of presidency-defining decisions. In the next three years, if the push to form a University-wide faculty senate continues, it will be up to Garber to determine the relationship between the senate and Massachusetts Hall.

As interim president, Garber adopted a University policy against issuing statements on controversial issues — a popular move among faculty, but one whose consequences have yet to be felt. He also appointed task forces on addressing antisemitism and anti-Arab, anti-Muslim, and anti-Palestinian bias, which will issue their full recommendations in the fall. How Garber acts on those recommendations will be another test of his administration.

The Corporation’s move allowed them to reinforce Garber’s mandate while deferring a full-blown presidential search — usually a monthslong process of nominations, vetting, and advisory committees.

Several faculty said they thought Garber’s tenure would give the University breathing room to conduct a search out of the national spotlight.

“The Corporation’s reasons for appointing Alan to a term of office are understandable, given the unusual circumstances we face and the intense, partisan scrutiny universities are under,” Harvard Kennedy School professor Arthur I. Applbaum wrote in an emailed statement. “For a permanent appointment, a time-consuming, uncertainty-creating search taking us well into the next year would be required, but we need decisive leadership now.”

Harvard Law School professor Richard H. Fallon Jr. said he thought Garber, whose leadership he praised as “steady, sensible, smart,” would allow Harvard to move forward from its protracted crisis by the time his successor takes office.

“I am confident that the University will be in better shape to be handed over to somebody else to be the new president three years hence, as a result of Alan Garber’s having this interim period to try to steady things,” Fallon said.

—Staff writer Tilly R. Robinson can be reached at tilly.robinson@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @tillyrobin.

—Staff writer Neil H. Shah can be reached at neil.shah@thecrimson.com. Follow him on X @neilhshah15.