Harvard University has announced a significant policy shift on Tuesday, stating that it will no longer issue official statements on public matters that do not directly affect the university's core functions. This decision follows a period of intense scrutiny and criticism over the institution's responses to various social and political issues. The policy, which aims to embrace institutional neutrality, was formulated after gathering input from over 1,000 faculty, students, staff, and alumni through 31 focus groups. The move is seen as an effort to refocus on academic freedom and avoid the pitfalls of polarized politics. Some critics argue that this change is a craven attempt to avoid controversy, while others see it as a necessary step to protect the university's commitment to truth and open inquiry. The decision has sparked debate about the role of universities in public discourse, with some suggesting it may lead to similar policies at other institutions, such as MIT.
When told Affirmative Action harms Whites, more than 60% of nonblack Democrats support it. When told Affirmative Action hurts Asians, their support drops below 40%. Follow: @AFpost https://t.co/qIgvUiMfuu
I compared Harvard's new "Institutional Voice" report to institutional neutrality policies at other universities. In @thecrimson, here's how it stacks up: https://t.co/cm4IIjOIvi
They emphasize decades of data showing that the scores tend to screen out many low-income, minority applicants who don't score as highly on the standardized tests as their white and Asian-American counterparts. https://t.co/9mRCsEfOZj
The Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (SFFA) continues to stir debate on race-conscious admissions. In a new issue brief, @MichaelTHartney and @RenuMukherjee1 challenge misconceptions surrounding the ruling: https://t.co/S3VMLaH9zq https://t.co/PPzKx7N3zR
For those asking: 74 percent of blacks support discrimination against whites in college admissions, and 66 percent support discrimination against Asians. https://t.co/BHZhRytQ9k
#POV @OmarSHaqueMDPhD, Harold J. Bursztajn, MD Protecting academic freedom on campus requires content-neutral policies that will help keep specific political ideologies from dominating. When the rules apply to all, both free speech and order can coexist. https://t.co/OnSM2u0NGt https://t.co/8qaKPKSuym
Colleges, companies and sports teams should stay mum on politics, says contributor Adam B. Coleman https://t.co/ONHASj2oYw https://t.co/rCiHV6k8iV
63.4% of Democrats support DEI policies that harm white people. Support drops to 37.8% if those policies harm Asians. In other words, DEI has nothing to do with leveling playing fields… it's all about racial animosity towards white people. https://t.co/RLYJotKCjF
Harvard’s pivot toward institutional neutrality is a public relations fix and nothing more, writes @neetu_arnold Read more at UnHerd 👇 https://t.co/QYHKpD47i0
A Manhattan federal judge dismissed a race and sex discrimination lawsuit challenging the selection process for New York University School of Law’s flagship law review https://t.co/zbqKzuUNpq @Karen_Sloan1 https://t.co/sCVmBRcpgU
NEW: In an original study for @ManhattanInst, @MichaelTHartney and I analyze data from the Cooperative Election Study (CES) and find that EVEN LIBERAL VOTERS are deeply uncomfortable with race-conscious admissions policies that disadvantage Asians.🧵 https://t.co/8TH9qtFu6V
NEW: In a study for @ManhattanInst, @MichaelTHartney and I analyze original data from the Cooperative Election Study (CES) and find that EVEN LIBERAL VOTERS are deeply uncomfortable with race-conscious admissions policies that harm Asian students. 🧵 https://t.co/8TH9qtFu6V
REPORT: Nearly two-thirds of nonblack Democrats support affirmative action—as long as it only discriminates against whites. When they are told it also discriminates against Asians, support drops below 40 percent. https://t.co/FNC5R7aUB9
Students For Fair Admissions: Affirming Affirmative Action And Shapeshifting Towards Cognitive Diversity?, 47 @SULawRev 1281 (2024) https://t.co/xP34fgMCax by Steven A. Ramirez (@LoyolaLaw) https://t.co/vPNptHuQ2J
Following Harvard's announcement yesterday, Syracuse University just announced that the university will no longer "make institutional statements or pronouncements on current controversies. "Learning from a diversity of viewpoints, and from the rigorous deliberation, debate, and…
At long last, Harvard's done making useless statements about social and political issues. Today, @thecrimson Editorial Board analyzes the decision — and identifies two questions this move leaves unanswered. https://t.co/faMX5WhWaP
While Harvard has adopted the correct position on institutional statements, it has once again squandered an opportunity to exercise moral leadership at a difficult time in higher education. Our @goACTA statement on Harvard’s Report on Institutional Voice: https://t.co/KxNzzOGK0Z
Harvard University won't issue statements on 'public matters,' school president confirms The working group that made the recommendation consists of faculty members from various departments across the university. Read more ⬇️ https://t.co/Slu4Hoew9U
Editorial: After criticism, Harvard decides to shut up and teach | Boston Herald Harvard University learned a lesson of its own: if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Harvard was more erudite, of course, as it announced Tuesday that the University and its leaders… https://t.co/I7qlGMHxLO
Editorial | Harvard University learned a lesson of its own: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. https://t.co/4D5JkHL0ik
What role should the government play in campus protests? @NealMcCluskey argues for respecting the autonomy of universities and prioritizing free speech. https://t.co/4hkTwsHd2P
Can emotional connections to our identities justify restrictions on free speech? John Tomasi talks to Jilian Lederman, a graduate of Brown University and a strong free speech advocate. Hx Out Loud Episode 17 drops tomorrow on your favorite app | Watch https://t.co/9UXteI48AF https://t.co/cZJzf09W84
SCOOP: English professor Tracy Smith and Carpenter Center Director Dan Byers resigned as co-chairs of Harvard’s Legacy of Slavery memorial committee over frustrations that Harvard administrators were trying to rush their process. @neilhshah15 reports. https://t.co/2gRrZmSIJw
Harvard, criticized for war response, to avoid stances on public issues https://t.co/fm76xBlMou https://t.co/lUckYUPVqd
.@SMULawSchool Symposium: Students For Fair Admissions v. UNC https://t.co/8xBytvhcTa @SMULawReview @LouisvilleLaw @ProfCMP @VinayHarpalani @UNM_Law @Loyola_NOLA @uiclaw @JoshMBlackman @STCL_Houston @Butler_Snow @CEOUSA @ProfDBernstein @georgemasonlaw @GailHeriot @USanDiegoLaw https://t.co/j8zkZOy0b6
Free speech on campus? Its nature, its importance, its limits. @Harvard @BKCHarvard @JonHaidt @jacklgoldsmith https://t.co/5fAWMaNdQv
Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog: Harvard to adopt Chicago's Kalven Report, after getting burned by pontificating administrators this past fall https://t.co/tdLKa1AjXc
Asian Americans overwhelmingly support teaching historical topics like slavery, racism, and segregation in public schools but strongly oppose colleges using race and ethnicity in admissions, a new survey finds. https://t.co/3SN0Bh1xb9
Harvard will stop commenting on external events. A good move. Such commentary is for students and faculty. The university administration should focus on defending academic freedom. https://t.co/u3WCs9ohsP
After "gathering input from every school and more than 1,000 faculty, students, staff, and alumni through 31 focus groups," Harvard decided that “[t]he university and its leaders should not...issue official statements about public matters”. In other words: https://t.co/N5c3Gb93QZ
A federal judge recently dismissed a closely watched case filed by the anti-DEI group founded by Stephen Miller, the former Trump White House adviser. https://t.co/Z0SYg6gR9J
Great news: Harvard embraces the telos of truth! “Our report argues that the university is fundamentally committed to a non-neutral set of values specifically, getting to the truth by experiment, open inquiry, and debate.” https://t.co/1j4cw6h1o6
Harvard adopts institutional neutrality. MIT no longer requires diversity statements from faculty applicants. The start of a domino effect in higher ed?
Harvard to stay silent on issues that don’t impact university’s ‘core function’ Harvard University announced Tuesday it will no longer weigh in on public matters that don’t impact the Ivy League school’s core function, a shift that follows a historic period of turmoil at the… https://t.co/WTTi4pBhi1
Harvard announces new restrictions on statements about 'controversial public policy issues' https://t.co/zgJtJVycsO
‘In an age of polarized politics, we also need a policy that will spare university leaders from having to spend all their time deciding which global & national events deserve statements …’ https://t.co/ieORbdeVEs
No, Harvard’s statement is not “good news”. It’s a craven attempt to climb out of a hole it dug for itself. To say nothing of the fact that it solves nothing—not even the thing they say it solves. Who will define which things are “public matters that do not directly affect… https://t.co/o63OwNhc2e