Stemming the Tide

Overstuffed door boxes, fully postered kiosks, and an activities fair that fills Tercentenary Theatre—all of these campus sights are evidence of a brooding problem: the overabundance, redundancy, and proliferation of student groups.

While student groups certainly add to the diversity, vibrancy, and quality of life on campus, they have spread to a point of saturation. The number of new student groups has increased each year since 1950 (when there were about 50) to reach their total last fall of 305, including 127 with under 25 members. While having so many groups for 6,650 students looks great in an admissions viewbook, in practice resources get spread too thin. By having fewer, stronger, and larger student groups, the College could actually be a more dynamic place.

Harvard is by no means the only campus where the proliferation of student groups is rampant. A study by the Harvard College Dean’s Office in the summer of 2004 found that Harvard’s ratio of one student group per 21 students was average for the Ivy League. Assistant Dean of the College Paul J. McLoughlin II says at national conferences, most administrators said they have had similar surges in the number of student groups. But the fact that Harvard is comparable to other institutions should not force Harvard to blindly accept a troubled status quo.

The problem with the overabundance of student groups can be seen in the glut of student publications, which currently total 34 with two more being added to the list shortly. It’s impossible to read even a fraction of them, and few students go through the arduous task of emptying overstuffed door boxes to even catch a glimpse of their covers. That’s not to say that half of all student publications should be shut down. But we should think twice before we create new ones and instead work within the structure of existing organizations. For example, some magazines, like Currier House’s prose magazine, are highly specific and could easily merge with others. And publications are not alone—there are five Christian fellowships, three Korean groups, and five business councils, just to give a few examples.

Evidence of the overabundance is everywhere. Many groups are made up of just a handful of people (all officers), so Harvard ends up with a lot of groups each getting a little done instead of fewer stronger groups that are major forces on campus. Furthermore, each year ten to 15 groups cease to exist due to graduation. Many new groups just aren’t sustainable without their original driving forces.

Most importantly, Harvard has a small and limited amount of grant money, most of which is distributed by the Undergraduate Council (UC). Aside from the boost in the UC’s budget due to last year’s fee hike, McLoughlin says there has been little growth in total grant money while the number of student groups has gone through the roof. If you do the math, the result is quite striking; the UC had about $213,500 to give out last year, but there are so many groups that distributed evenly, each group would only get about $700.

If multiple overlapping student groups merged or worked together, a lot of the overhead and duplicate infrastructure could be avoided, freeing up a sizable chunk of money. That money could go back to the student groups to allow them do to even more, or it could go other places, like HoCos (which were each eligible for $6,000 from the UC last year) and concerts.

But as important as slowing down the expansion of student groups seems, it is hard to put into practice. It’s difficult for the College to find grounds to reject students hoping to form official groups. It can set the bar high for new group proposals, and suggest that people work within existing groups, but that’s about it.

Still, there are ways to stem the spread of student groups by incentivizing cooperation between student groups and even encouraging them to merge; things are already moving in this direction. McLoughlin says the $25,000 student activities fund overseen by the College will be giving priority to grants where several student groups work together. The UC, which operates the largest grant fund should follow suit. Other incentive-based systems could also be created, including expediting grants for larger groups, and creating a fund to give money to groups that merge together.

Alternatively, the College could look into establishing a Phillip Brooks House Association-like umbrella organization for non-public service groups. Such an organization could consolidate overhead costs and encourage cooperation.

Finally, students need to change their résumé-building and more-is-better attitudes. A large part of the reason there are so many groups is that students feel the need to hold leadership positions. But having too many leaders redoubling each other’s efforts and serving for several years means that little of substance gets done.

Look around at Harvard, already an amazing place, and imagine it with better events, bigger concerts, more campus spirit, and more campus activism. That dream could be a reality—but first we have to be judicious when considering how we spread our limited resources for student groups.



Adam M. Guren ’08, a Crimson editor, is an economics concentrator in Eliot House.