More on Harvard and ROTC
Posted on December 21st, 2010 in Uncategorized | 11 Comments »
The Globe reports on Drew Faust’s announcement that Harvard will now welcome ROTC to its campus—though its unclear whether the Pentagon will actually establish a program there.
“At Harvard, ROTC has been like the crazy uncle in the attic: We know he’s up there but we don’t want to tell anyone that he’s there,’’ said Paul E. Mawn, a 1963 Harvard graduate and retired Navy captain who is chairman of Harvard Advocates for ROTC.
A potential barrier to Harvard getting its own unit is lack of student interest, Mawn said. Until several years ago, he said, students were not even allowed to list ROTC as an activity in the yearbook or post related fliers around campus.
I’m calling bullshit on this one. Really? You couldn’t put up ROTC fliers around campus? I don’t believe that for a second.
Anyone out there know the truth about Mawn’s claims? And why does Globe reporter Tracy Jan let factual allegations, inserted into the story by an alumnus, stand without determining their truth?
Sloppy.
It would be ironic if, after all this fuss from conservatives about Harvard banishing ROTC, the military decided it wasn’t interested in having a program there….
“There is an attitude among some senior people in the Pentagon that elite Ivy League universities threw us out when we were at war, so why should we bother with them now,’’ he said. “It’s a lot cheaper to train an officer in Podunk, Okla., than spending $50,000 sending someone to Harvard or Yale.’
Again, I question the reporting: Other than being a slightly curmudgeonly, potentially paranoid alum, who the heck is Paul Mawn and does he really know what senior people in the Pentagon think?
If he does, Tracy Jan should tell us how. And if he doesn’t, Jan shouldn’t let him make claims about things he has no way of knowing.
I miss the Globe sometimes.
11 Responses
12/21/2010 7:02 am
“Should a group of students that is not a formally recognized organization wish to distribute printed matter on campus, permission to do so may be granted by the Office of Student Life upon submission of a petition signed by ten registered undergraduates. Distribution cannot occur until approval has been made explicit. … The bottom right-hand corner of all posters must clearly denote the official student organization’s name and include details on accessibility.” Handbook for Students
This was among the consequences of ROTC not being recognized. While I was dean a “ROTC Association” was formed as a support group, open to all students and not under the control of the military.
12/21/2010 7:14 am
I should have said “IS one of the consequences.” The temporary permission clause was added not as a loophole but to take care of groups like “Harvard Students for Vilsack” which would become irrelevant by the time the approval process could be completed.
12/21/2010 7:41 am
One more comment, as two different Faculty votes need to be distinguished. The Harvard ROTC unit was abolished in 1969 for reasons having nothing to do with service by gays and lesbians. That is when Harvard students started participating in the unit at MIT. The 1993 vote went a step further, and prohibited any use of university funds or any other use of university resources in support of ROTC (including shuttle buses to take the cadets down Mass Ave, rooms to hold organizational meetings, space on the poster kiosks, etc.). The repeal of DADT rescinds the premise of the ’93 legislation, but has nothing to do with the many issues that resulted in the ’69 vote.
The whole time I was dean I was told by the ROTC officials that the military was merging units for reasons of efficiency, not dividing them. Don’t know whether that is still true.
As for student interest, I’d guess it would rise, but don’t forget that in most universities one of the incentives for ROTC service is to get your education paid for, which is less of an issue due to Harvard’s financial aid policies.
12/21/2010 9:27 am
Harry-Point taken regarding DADT/1969, but the social climate is so different now, it’s hard to imagine ROTC stirring up much fuss in a post-DADT world.
As for the signs, I guess one can understand the policy—you don’t want every organization trying to sell something to Harvard students able to put up signs all over campus—without seeing it as targeted against ROTC. Certainly the ten signatures hurdle seems easy enough to leap.
12/21/2010 9:57 am
Getting rid of ROTC was not just a social issue, although the politics of the time were certainly behind the move. I paste below the text of the vote of 2/4/69 (there were a couple of other votes later in the spring). #4 is moot, of course. And perhaps the services wouldn’t need #1-3. But I shouldn’t think that rescinding THIS vote and restoring the status quo ante wouldn’t “stir up a fuss,” to use your language.
Whereas, the ROTC (Reserve Officers Training Corps) program is externally controlled, i.e., taught by professors who do not hold regular appointments.
That the Faculty of Arts and Sciences
1. Withhold academic credit from any courses offered by the three branches of ROTC at Harvard in the future.
2. Request the Harvard Corporation to terminate the Faculty appointments of the present instructors of these courses as soon as possible after the end of the current academic year and to make not further such appointments.
3. Request the Harvard Corporation to withdraw the description of ROTC courses from the course catalogue and to cease the free allocation of space in University buildings to ROTC.
4. Provide scholarship funds where need is created by this Faculty decision.
12/21/2010 10:49 am
See also the WSJ article today, which is consistent with the Globe on the questions about the Pentagon’s attitude.
12/21/2010 1:12 pm
This post was unfair. You ripped that poor journalist based on a very weak assumption. Harry Lewis didn’t need to be a former dean to fact-check that one. Of course a school can control what gets posted on its private property. Maybe Harvard’s rules seem silly, but is that really surprising to someone who wrote a book on Harvard’s wrongheaded ways?
12/28/2010 12:08 am
Jets lost. Giants lost, sucked.
12/28/2010 9:32 am
My point is that the journalist should have found out for herself, rather than letting factual information within the body of an article be inserted by an alum rather than by an objective voice, i.e., the reporter.
12/28/2010 9:33 am
Or “himself,” as the case may be.
11/22/2015 12:13 pm
In the bali, bali, everything is scedeulhd last minute mentality of Korea- I have found it’s best to leave everything to the last minute. It never fails, when I schedule student conferences, special meeting times outside of my office hour, or practically any class assignment- they are always late or don’t show at all. And yeah, they have my twitter, my email and my kakao so it’s not like they can’t get a hold of me either.I like presentations also, so I usually devote class time to work on them and have them present the project at the end of class, or have them polish it at the start of the next class and get going. I used to be big on scheduling things far in advance, but since I have starting letting things happen as they may the results have been better and less stressful for me when students aren’t there at the assigned time.Good luck! I feel your pain.