Curricular Review Draft Reports Released

After months of meetings, five of the six central committees of the Harvard College Curricular Review have completed draft reports of their findings for the first major revamping of the curriculum in decades.

Working separately, the committees have identified specific shortcomings in the current undergraduate experience and drafted targeted suggestions for improvement.

The reports have been distributed to the Faculty in preparation for tomorrow’s Faculty meeting.

The draft reports largely echo and expand upon the recommendations of the April 2004 Report on the Harvard College Curricular Review, but reject last year’s controversial suggestion to move to a Yale-style housing system.

This year’s findings include recognition of the disparate nature of Harvard’s resources in writing, advising, and teaching, and call for a more unified structure. The reports also stress the need to create a richer and more stimulating undergraduate experience—from restructured science courses to an array of unconventional programs that would make up a possible January Term.

“The [April 2004] report laid out some very broad brush strokes,” said Robert A. Lue, a senior lecturer on molecular and cellular biology and member of three curricular review committees. “What you’re beginning to see in these reports is something that is a bit more detailed.”

The five draft reports are the first major products of this year’s review process to be released to the entire Faculty. The sixth committee’s draft, addressing General Education, was never widely released due to criticism that it lacks an over-arching vision. The General Education Committee is currently reviewing their report.

COMMITTEE ON ADVISING AND COUNSELING

The advising report supported last year’s call for a greater separation between residential and academic advising, as well as increased faculty participation in advising.

The committee highlighted the need for an identifiable concentration adviser for all students and increased guidance for students during the semesters prior to concentration declaration.

The reports included a suggested timetable to guide the interactions between advisers and advisees.

The advising committee writes in the report that Harvard currently has “an overall system [of advising] that is highly decentralized.”

In response to this decentralization and the resulting student dissatisfaction with advising, the committee recommends the creation of a new position—a dean of advising—along with a peer advising program, under which each first-year student would be paired with an upperclassman during the summer before their arrival at Harvard.

This year’s report rejects last year’s endorsement of Yale-style housing—in which students are assigned to an upperclass House upon matriculation, instead of after the freshman year—citing the distance between the Yard and Houses as their reason.

COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE TEACHING OF WRITING AND SPEAKING

After last year’s report called for a review of the Expository Writing program, the committee charged with this task greatly broadened its focus. The committee made suggestions not only to improve instruction in writing, but also identified a need for courses that teach public speaking and rhetoric.

Noting that Harvard currently places “too much expectation and burden” on the Expository Writing program, the committee supports the creation of upper-level writing courses and the integration of writing instruction into regular coursework.

To facilitate this goal, the committee proposes the creation of a single center that would combine the various writing programs of the College, such as the Writing Center and the Expository Writing Program.

The report also calls for the creation of a certificate—similar to that given to students completing a language citation—that recognizes students who further explore the study of written and oral communication.

Perhaps most notably for incoming first-years, the reports suggests that Expository Writing 20 be graded satisfactory/unsatisfactory on students’ transcripts.

COMMITTEE ON A JANUARY TERM

After last year’s report recommended the creation of a January Term, this year’s report explores the breadth of experiences and options available to Harvard students should such a change be made to the academic calendar by the Harvard Corporation.

Rather than proposing a model January Term experience, the committee included options as varied as intensive language study abroad, geography classes, student-taught seminars and “work in a culinary tradition” in the report.

Members of the committee stressed the importance of a January Term that is flexible and optional, noting the program could provide a much-needed break from the rigid structure of the academic year.

COMMITTEE ON PEDAGOGICAL IMPROVEMENT

Moving away from an emphasis on small classes—a major point in last year’s report—the committee sought to clarify, organize, and improve the teaching resources at Harvard College.

Pleased with the move to on-line Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) evaluations, committee members now seek to make CUE evaluations more relevant for individual classes by offering a “menu of optional questions” for instructors.

The committee offered concrete ways to execute last year’s directive to centralize programs aimed at improving teaching. In particular, the report stresses the need to reorganize the College website and designate an individual in each department to coordinate resources for teaching and training instructors.

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION

The newly released report outlines in detail the change in science requirements deemed necessary by last year’s report.

Interdisciplinary courses integrating fundamental concepts and their practical applications will replace current introductory courses in mathematics and the life and physical sciences, such as Chemistry 5 and Biological Sciences 50.

While reforms proposed by other committees have yet to be implemented, the suggestions from the Committee on Science and Technology Education have already started to become realities.

Life Sciences 1a and 1b will launch next year, inaugurating a new type of problem-based, introductory science course intended to generate lasting student interest in the sciences.

—Staff writer Allison A. Frost can be reached at afrost@fas.harvard.edu.

—Staff writer Evan H. Jacobs can be reached at ehjacobs@fas.harvard.edu.