“As a grad student, I was even told recently that I might be spending too much time with undergrads”

Would having class in my sorority house so we could all eat breakfast count? Nate, one of the things I LOVED about you as a GSI was the fact that you would talk to us about our personal lives as well as our studies. It made me enjoy the classes all that much more.

And I’m not just saying that because of the law school rec you wrote me.

Dave,

I’m sympathetic, but what you describe is not the attitude of most undergrads today. They’re here to get a credential so they can go make money. So for them, college is just what you need to get to med school. Learning for learning’s sake they would say is a nice idea, but it’s not very profitable.

But I agree. I don’t have much sympathy. In fact, most of us who teach undergrads can tell when they are getting to know us for such instrumental reasons, because we’re better at such stuff than they are, so we can spot it easily. Perhaps the reason this student (and similar others) have a problem getting to know “enough” faculty is that they don’t want to get to know someone who’s just using them and does not share their priorities. Bluntly, the faculty may not be interested in getting to know a student who just wants a letter out of the relationship.

perhaps the comment from ms. lee says it all: ”I’ve had a lot of trouble getting to know enough faculty to get the recommendations I need for medical school.” is this the goal of higher education–getting a recommendation for medical school? what about learning for learning’s sake, or to understand the world better, or out of intellectual curiosity. had ms. lee complained about how difficult it is to track down professors for the purpose of a deeper understanding of the material, i would likely feel more sympathy for her.

You should have read the screed I thought about sending to the Atlantic
after that Douthat piece. I agree that he basically whined that no one
challenged him. Most undergrads don’t seem to get that the faculty at
their university don’t spend much time thinking about them. Undergrads
don’t get you tenure or advance you in your career–as an economist
would say, the relationship between faculty and undergrad isn’t
incentivized in the direction of undergraduates.  And depending,
it can be similar for grads.As a grad student, I was even told
recently that I might be spending too much time with undergrads, taking
away from my real work.  This may be true, but I think it may also
be indicative.

I think you’re right that Harvard is not all that different from other big prestigious research universities. I sort of agree with Matt Yglesias that the problem isn’t Harvard, it’s Harvard undergrads, who are just the sort of obsessive, driven, depressive people who would be unhappy anywhere (I say this as a former Harvard undergrad). (Matt summed it up as follows: “Basically, the admissions office seems to me to put a high premium on psychologically disturbed obsessive individuals who are unlikely to become well-adjusted members of human society.”) I doubt that a student union would help that much, because we already have Loker and no one uses it (yes, Loker is pretty lame, but part of the reason it’s lame is because it’s full of us Harvard kids, who are ourselves pretty lame).

On the “taking initiative” point, I agree - that’s one thing that annoyed me about Ross Douthat’s screed against Harvard - he seemed to be complaining that no one forced him to work hard and take rigorous classes.