Restructuring Redux

Beginning with the contentious ousting of then Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis ’68, Harvard’s attempt to dramatically restructure the administrative offices of University Hall has at times been rocky. Perhaps it was inevitable that in hiring and firing so many new and veteran members of the College administration, some feathers would be ruffled. Still, at many points along the way, we have expressed hesitation and uneasiness at the manner in which this restructuring has been carried out; at times the powers that be have seemed to make their restructuring plans up as they go along. However, to be fair, many of our worries have ultimately proven unwarranted. This month’s announcement of two new deans—a major restructuring of the College administration—can only be evaluated in the context of these other recent changes. We hope, like other aspects of the restructuring, the benefits will ultimately outweigh the obvious concerns, and we look forward to watching how these positions evolve in the coming years.

In 2003, when Lewis was fired, his departure was explained under the dubious pretense of “restructuring.” In fact, the relevant issue at the time—combining the positions of Dean of the College and Dean of Undergraduate Education—had been initially proposed by Lewis years earlier. Details of how the new über-dean of the College would operate were scarce, and we worried that haphazardly combining the immense responsibilities of two large and complicated bureaucracies under one individual might be fundamentally flawed. When then Dean of Undergraduate Education Benedict H. Gross ’71 was appointed to the new position, we predicted that his tenure might be troublesome, bemoaning the fact that he would likely be forced to delegate responsibilities rather than paying student life the kind of careful, close attention an independent Dean of the College could give.

And delegate responsibilities is just what Gross did. With the addition of the new residential life and advising positions announced this month, the College will have added or has plans to add seven new administrative posts within two years. In June Gross hired Currier House Co-Master Patricia O’Brien as deputy dean, a position he created to handle many administrative matters within the College. When the position of deputy dean of the College was announced, Undergraduate Council President Matthew W. Mahan ’05 echoed our concerns: “Anything that puts another degree of separation between the student body representatives and the ultimate decision-maker is bad for students.”

But Harvard College’s restructuring has been accompanied by a palpable new attitude in the University Hall toward engaging with students—as Mahan put it, an attitude of “working closely with students and ensuring access to the highest levels of administration.” To Gross’ credit, he has proven himself very capable of delegating without sacrificing his close connection to the student body. He has been praised consistently from student leaders campus-wide for his candor, concern, and genuine willingness to listen. As long as Gross remains so, his administrative additions must be understood as just that—additional administrators to oversee aspects of student life rather than additional layers of bureaucracy to obstruct needed reforms.

The two new deans at issue this month both have the potential to positively impact student life. One of these deans will watch over residential life and the other will manage the overhaul of Harvard’s seriously inadequate (and nonsensical) academic advising system. Both problems were identified in the ongoing Harvard College Curricular Review. The nationwide search for the right individuals to take on these duties begins this spring, and we are hopeful that the new deans will move the College toward a more unified residential life experience and a carry out crucial reforms to Harvard’s advising.

With respect to residential life, the new dean will oversee the dean and associate deans of freshman, and the resident House Masters. This change in management (as the outgoing Dean of Freshman Elizabeth Studley Nathans currently answers to Deputy Dean O’Brien) suggests better coordination between the Houses and the Yard. Even if the College does not implement Yale-style freshman housing assignments—which we firmly oppose—this administrative change could be useful in working to bridge the gap between freshmen and upperclassmen. Under the current structure of anachronistic proctors and irregular faculty advising assignments, guidance for freshman is decidedly hit or miss—with the misses accounting for an unacceptable majority. The appointment of Thomas A. Dingman ’67 as the new dean of freshman at the end of this year is an opportune time for change, and again, we renew our urge to provide prefects and upperclass advisors an increased presence in the Yard.

All students of the College, not just freshmen, have the potential to benefit from a new dean of advising. Centralizing the administration of undergraduate advising may enhance whatever other reforms ultimately emerge from the curricular review. Ultimately, improving coordination and making advising information more accessible are necessary components of any reform. But Gross’ almost-certain plans to create a student advising center should be treated with care. To be sure, the proposed center could be immensely helpful, but much of its success depends on how exactly it is integrated into College academic life. It will never replace the specific and expert faculty advising that truly informs students about concentrations.

While the new structure of these deanships is promising in its vision, as always, the administration must take care to maintain a clear focus on student needs. Gross must be wary of creating bureaucratic cobwebs that hinder more than they help; after all, appointing new deans is not a solution in itself, but simply a mechanism for putting the spotlight on an important issue. The test will be in the changes themselves. In his time so far as dean of the College, Gross has followed in Lewis’ footsteps by listening well to students, speaking openly with them and maintaining a strong presence in most matters of undergraduate life—and in many ways, his candor has exceeded students’ expectations. We hope these new appointments will enable the College administration to tackle large, pressing problems without increasing Gross’ distance from students.