Report Raps University Governance

A Ralph Nader-sponsored organization today released a report blasting Harvard for its system of governance, saying that top-level decisionmaking remains "cloaked in secrecy."

In the latest volley on the issue of open governance, Harvard Watch attacked what it said was inadequate administration openness to student input.

The organization, which was founded a year ago to scrutinize the University, made several recommendations, including that the seven-man Corporation publish edited minutes from its twice-monthly meetings.

In an interview yesterday, consumer advocate Ralph Nader charged that Harvard had failed "to tap the ideas of its students. It's an institution that has established a successful restraint on the expectation levels of its students," Nader said.

"[Harvard] thinks it can get away with it because they have preened the studentsto be number one. There's a kind of ego massagethere," he said.

He added that an attitude of questioning andopenness in the classroom should be matched by asimilar attitude among top administrators. "Whyshould we have this in the classroom when at thetop, there's medieval darkness."

The 87-page report also recommended:

.that the self-perpetuating Corporationestablish a quota of at least one woman and oneminority among its members;

.that students be allowed to participate in theselection of honorary degree recipients, the namesof which are kept secret until Commencementmorning;

.that top administrators annually prepare aposition paper on the State of the Students; and

.that students be allowed to serve on academiccommittees of the Board of Overseers.

In an interview Friday, President Bok said hewas opposed to the idea of publishing the minutesof Corporation meetings because of theadministrative burden on the University.

He added that publication of the minutes wouldnot be useful because of "how little they pertainto undergraduates, and how much timeundergraduates would spend reading them."

The Harvard Watch report comes on the heels ofan ongoing debate about open governance at theUniversity. Last spring, a select group ofundergraduates met privately with the Corporationafter a petition campaign for an open meeting wasrejected by that body