Even after trouncing Yale in the Harvard-Yale game, we should remember how greatly Yale has affected our history. Our rivalry with Yale continues to shape us into a better college and institution, even centuries later.
By 1825, Yale and Harvard were already well on each other’s radars. Yale’s Reports on the Course of Instruction in Yale College, published in 1828, notes that “the competition of colleges may advance the interests of literature: if it is a competition for excellence, rather than for numbers, if each aims to surpass the others, not in an imposing display, but in the substantial value of its education.” Such was the fundamental concern of Yale, alluding to Harvard and Amherst, as suggested by David B. Potts’ Liberal Education for a Land of Colleges.
Two Sides of the Same Coin?
The Harvard – Yale rivalry trumps all others among the Ivy League, at least in publicity. But what drove this unique partnership? Part of this can be attributed to distance, which allows students to “interact, mostly at The Game but perhaps via conferences they attend at or near each other’s campuses,” argues Fabian Poliak A.B. ‘11. “Even for those who puncture the Harvard Square bubble, the world seemingly vanishes beyond New York City. There, in obscurity, are Princeton and Penn.”
While Harvard and Yale are locked into a competition for excellence, both colleges maintain largely similar curricula. In many ways, Harvard and Yale have converged to an ideal liberal arts education that encourages deeper exploration of a concentration (or “major” in Yale-speak) while maintaining a standard “general education” that requires students to engage their faculties in pursuit of knowledge in science, the humanities, mathematics, and foreign language.
Yale’s most recent curriculum changes, proposed in a 2003 report from the Committee on Yale College Education, reflect a renewed commitment to the liberal arts. The committee established a series of goals for Yale College, among them: “to sustain and strengthen a culture of close intellectual contact between faculty and students … to enhance the international dimension of the Yale College education … and to improve academic advising, especially in the years before the choice of a major.”
Harvard’s recent overhaul of the Core Curriculum in favor of the Program in General Education, following 2006’s Curricular Renewal in Harvard College, brought with it the same concern for a well-rounded and well-implemented liberal arts education. Furthermore, the report concluded that, among other things, Harvard ought to “re-commit our Faculty to the central task of educating undergraduates … recommend students to pursue a significant international experience … [and] engage more vigorously in developing advising programs.” Sound familiar?
Harvard alum Maureen Austin (A.B. ‘83 M.B.A. ‘92) offers her hypothesis for Harvard and Yale’s intimate connection, saying: “in the early days, as today, I imagine there was great collaboration between the entities on many topics and issues which has formed the basis for the evolution of higher education, independent thinking and revolutionary ideas.”
That both colleges refocused their efforts around the same time suggests that both Harvard and Yale do actively influence each other, especially within the context of their liberal arts curricula. Perhaps in response to a refocusing in New Haven, Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences refocused itself. Acting competitively may keep Harvard from falling behind, but Harvard will require continuous innovation to win the race.
But Worlds Apart
While Harvard and Yale are similar in several core aspects, both also constantly work to differentiate themselves. This process of differentiation will continue to bring about excellence, challenge stagnation, and encourage growth for both Harvard and Yale as both colleges pursue different methods of expanding education to a broader audience.
Yale today demonstrates a strong departure from the plans of yesteryear. Their 1825 Report on the Course of Instruction Committee denounced the idea of “making the college more accessible to different descriptions of persons, enlarg[ing] our numbers, and in that way, increas[ing] our income” for fear of becoming “a college in name only, and in reality nothing more than an academy.” By contrast, Yale today aggressively pursues global expansion both physically and influentially through a liberal arts collaboration between Yale and the National University of Singapore (Yale-NUS) and other measures. At the same time, Harvard now debates over whether or not to follow in our Ivy League rival’s footsteps.
Whether the growth of massive MOOCs (massive open online courses) through HarvardX, the development of the School of Engineering Arts and Sciences into Allston, or the expansion of Harvard’s financial aid initiative will each ultimately help Harvard and its legacy remains to be seen. What is certain is that Harvard cannot maintain influence or relevance without sharing a similar regard for experimentation. Harvard need not replicate Yale’s project, but it must certainly remain innovative and challenge the status quo, lest it be left in the dust.
Harvard and Yale’s more than 300 year-old relationship remains unmatched in American higher education. The Harvard-Yale rivalry is an institutional staple for both schools, a nod to the profound history that each shares. While the Crimson Craze may become most prominent leading up to the game, the same intensity, passion, and desire for improvement encourages Harvard to become a better college.
“While The Game is considered a long time rivalry,” notes Ms. Austin, “in many ways it is more of a tradition than anything. A way for two great institutions to come together in a friendly and spirited way.
“And with its timing right before Thanksgiving, a chance for all of us to be thankful for the freedom we have as Americans, the opportunities we have been afforded as alums, and to be reminded of the duty we have to uphold the importance of education.”
