As Harvard resumes the initiative to move the College’s science complexes across the Charles River to Allston, much tension remains. The plan, first proposed under the administration of former President Larry Summers and modified slightly under President Drew Faust, is part of a broader effort to update and modernize Harvard to reflect the growing importance of engineering and technology in the 21st century.
Although an admirable goal, the University must remain committed to achieving this in an ethical and balanced manner. Both the local dilution of the Harvard brand and the inherent segregation that will be faced by undergraduates are problematic; such issues must be discussed and dealt with before a hasty resumption of the plan occurs.
Katie Cagen, a senior in Mather House and student-planning board member of the project, said that she thinks “it will be much more difficult to attract talented students and faculty to SEAS if we are relocated to Allston. The real strength of our programs is the integration we have with the sciences in FAS and the rest of the university. Our philosophy for undergraduate education is that we are ‘engineering embedded in the liberal arts,’ and we offer students the opportunity to get a deep technical education in addition to a well-rounded liberal arts education.”
That level of integration has been crucial for Harvard’s ability to offer potential engineering students an education unrivaled by other comparable schools. Princeton’s engineering quad, for instance, creates a physical separation between A.B. and B.S. candidates, something Harvard’s commitment to the liberal arts has prevented.
Here, it is possible for the two different degree candidates to share the same resources and faculty throughout one’s undergraduate career. The Science Center is as much a part of the Yard as anything else is–arguably, a true center of the College. But should some of the College’s departments move 20 minutes away, such collaboration is threatened.
Instead, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences must remain a true amalgamation of these two aspects of education. A separation of the Arts from the Sciences would result in a significant destruction of Harvard’s mission.
Cagen endorses a plan for “graduate students and research labs to be moved to Allston, and then undergraduate teaching could be expanded into the spaces they would vacate in Cambridge … That setup would allow us to preserve the proximity to the Yard for undergrads while opening up new space for grad students and research facilities, which is definitely needed.”
Admitting that such a plan is not without other issues, it is important to recognize the importance of the identity of Harvard College. Amid a larger university that is appropriately segregated–Harvard Law northwest of the Science Center, HBS right across the river, Harvard Medical School in Longwood, among others–the College must maintain its centralized identity, lest an already splintered community become even more fractured.
Harvard already suffers from the notion that it invests too many of its resources into graduate students, neglecting the undergraduates at times. Steamrolling the Allston question could potentially add to such concerns. If Harvard wishes to attract the greatest students from all over the world, it must re-establish its unchallenged position as the greatest College in the world.
Arguably, this project serves as one of the ways in which FAS is capable of doing this. Samuel Becker, a freshman in Straus and potential Mechanical Engineering concentrator, agrees.
“A willingness to innovate and expand and a rejection of the status quo are the sources of Harvard’s legacy. This project demonstrates that Harvard is willing to put money, time, and effort into SEAS and adds legitimacy for students who question Harvard’s commitment to science and engineering.”
“But Harvard has to be careful to avoid breaking up the residential community of scholars that is so central to the ‘Harvard experience,’” Mr. Becker adds.
The University therefore needs to avoid deviating from these goals as it acts in the name of modernization and progress. The Allston expansion will occur, and is a necessary annex for the University to expand. More importantly, it must do so carefully.
The Harvard Campaign adds to the legitimacy and shaping of the objectives of the project. President Faust’s vision of having a “Harvard, by its 400th anniversary, less as a campus of separate precincts and more as a unified campus with a river running through its center,” is universally agreeable. And it’s certainly attainable.
But that’s quite a long time from now. More importantly, Harvard must be able to maintain and improve its position in attracting the world’s greatest engineering students. How Harvard manages that over the next two decades presents a challenge and defines how Harvard must approach the Allston expansion.