Second-Guessing Secondary Fields

The Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) voted Tuesday to institute a “secondary field” option (essentially, a minor) as the first in a series of curricular review proposals brought forth by the Educational Policy Committee (EPC). Theoretically, these secondary fields could function similarly to the way citation and certificate programs function now, giving students credit for in-depth work in a non-concentration field by taking four to six classes in a specific area.

On the surface, the concept of the secondary concentration seems appealing. Students are getting recognition for the work they’re doing. English concentrators will be able to prove definitively to the investment banking recruiter that they have quantitative skills; their economics secondary field recognition will prove it.

Unfortunately, this recognition comes at a heavy cost. More likely then not, the secondary field option will unduly pressure students to make curricular choices that will ultimately leave them less satisfied. The game theory dynamic is unavoidable. Dog eats dog in the Harvard world, and graduating without this additional feather in one’s cap will be frowned upon soon enough. Once there is a secondary field option in place, and as a few students begin to opt into it, a large number of students will quickly feel compelled to do so as well. Harvard is currently one of the few bastions of higher education spared the onslaught of double-major-triple-minor students. We want it to stay that way.

The philosophy behind Harvard’s current educational system is one that emphasizes finding the right mix of breadth—general education—and depth—concentration requirements—to create a comprehensive and enriching academic experience. A departure from this philosophy represents Harvard at its worst: responding to short-term market forces and the expense of sound conviction. In addition to breadth and depth, students will now unavoidably be pursuing credentials—credentials for things that are irrelevant to a worthwhile academic experience. And these students can hardly be blamed for it: they are each the victim of their peers, responding to perceived pressures, beholden to the whims of employers, graduate schools, and other ends which trivialize the integrity of their academic journey.

Students currently have the freedom to take a wide range of elective classes, and if concentration requirements are reformed or reduced, then students will have all the more opportunity to pursue other courses freely. Adding to a student’s jam-packed schedule six courses for a secondary field in addition to the twelve the EPC recommends as concentration requirement will make a student’s plan of study even more rigid than it is now. Students should be able to pursue their academic passions without having to stress over transcripts on a new level. The FAS should stick with the system it’s got.