Harvard leaders adopt a policy of avoiding official statements on social and political issues

Harvard’s leadership will no longer issue official statements on social or political issues unless they have a direct impact on the “core function of the university,” the university announced Tuesday.

Going forward, administrators will state that they will only make statements on behalf of the university on matters related to the university’s core values ​​of academic freedom and an open research environment.

“University leaders are hired for their ability to lead a higher education institution, not their expertise in public affairs,” said the report released by the eight-member working group. “Therefore, when speaking in their official roles, they should limit themselves to matters within their institutional expertise and responsibility: the running of the university.”

Harvard’s new position comes after a tumultuous year on campus, shortly after the start of the Gaza war last October, which sparked protests on campus and divisions among students, faculty, staff and alumni.

The report was published by a faculty-led group that formed in April called the Institutional Voice Working Group. It was created as part of a Harvard initiative to cultivate constructive dialogue, academic freedom, and open inquiry on campus.

“We have adopted the report and recommendations of the Faculty Working Group, which have also been endorsed by the Harvard Corporation,” interim president Alan Garber wrote in a Tuesday email to members of the school community.

According to the report, the directive applies to anyone who can speak on behalf of the university, including the provost, provost, deans and others with administrative responsibilities.

Working group members said their recommendations and the new policy do not require complete institutional neutrality when a university refuses to take a public position on any social or political issue, such as the position adopted by the University of Chicago in 1967 during the Vietnam War War protests.

Noah Feldman, a Harvard Law School professor and co-chair of the working group, said Harvard leaders can still speak officially about the university’s core values ​​as well as anything that has to do with running the university.

“This is their area of ​​expertise and they shouldn’t be neutral about it,” he said in an interview. “The university as a whole is not an expert in foreign policy. The university as a whole is not an expert in domestic politics.”

Feldman added that the creation of the working group was not a direct response to Harvard’s efforts to respond to the war in Gaza and the resulting protests and encampments. However, he said the tensions had indeed highlighted the fact that official guidance was badly needed.

“If the university had a clear policy that people could understand, it would be much more difficult for anyone, both outside and within the university, to criticize the university for not taking a stand, for taking too strong a stand, or for taking a stand that is not the stand they expected it to take. university,” he added.

Former Harvard president Claudine Gay faced sharp rebuke for her remarks shortly after Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel – first for delaying her statement and then for failing to strongly condemn the attacks.

In an interview with the Harvard Gazette, Harvard’s official news outlet, working group co-chair and philosophy professor Alison Simmons explained the timeline for the new policy. She cited the rapid dissemination of messages through social media and the “extreme political polarization” of the time as barriers to controlling university communications or people’s reactions to them.

“These two changes were certainly visible after October 7. But they have been in place for a long time,” Simmons told the outlet. “And the combination of these two new realities made it important to create policy.”

The working group’s recommendations were developed and written by eight Harvard faculty members from diverse backgrounds and political views, as well as representatives from departments such as theology, education, public health and law. Members also conducted surveys and interviews with over 1,000 faculty and students.

“One of the main conclusions from the listening sessions is that almost no one is particularly satisfied with the statements the university has issued in the past,” said working group member Martin West, who is also dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

West admits the new policy will likely take some getting used to, in part because society has become accustomed to listening to institutional leaders when it comes to major world events. He hopes university officials will take the time to remind the community that when a new policy is implemented, the lack of a statement does not mean there is no concern. He hopes this move will help create a more inclusive environment on campus.

“I think it will take our community some time to adjust to this new reality,” West said.