5 ms·
Is this article bringing any new perspective to the table? I suspect there is a quarterly Crimson tradition of superficial administration-bloat-decrying by Harv
by lsy 4y ago
Is this article bringing any new perspective to the table? I suspect there is a quarterly Crimson tradition of superficial administration-bloat-decrying by Harvard sophomores with nearly-parodic bylines like (in this case) "Brooks B. Anderson, Government concentrator in Pforzheimer House". What's missing is a comparison to other schools, a comparison to corporate bloat or lack thereof, or any reflection on the causes of the cost increase beyond "bureaucracy is bad". I was actually quite surprised to learn that Harvard tuition costs have only doubled in real terms over 36 years. To me that doesn't seem like a lot when considering the increase in demand for college education (UC tuition has increased 4x in the same time period). Is 2x a lot compared to other things? The article doesn't say, choosing instead to quote Josh Hawley and deride easy targets like inclusive signage committees.
- burkaman 4y agoI agree, I feel like I learned nothing from this. > As I made my way to the Parking Office, I had to ask myself: Where did all these people come from? And do we really need them here? Did you? Instead of yourself, couldn't you have asked someone who actually knows the answer to these questions, like the administrators themselves, or former college presidents or something? Do an actual investigation and write a real article, not a low effort opinion piece. This is not really specific to the Crimson though, I have this same issue with all opinion writing and I don't understand why newspapers do it. I've never met someone who pays for a publication but would stop if it didn't have op-eds. I don't think it's just about outrage clicks or something, editorials and op-eds have been around forever so there must be some population that loves them for some reason.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]