Finding a Voice For Athletes

“Athletics play a significant role in the lives of many Harvard students,” boasts the glossy viewbook that the Admissions Office gives to every high school student who passes through Byerly Hall and mails to thousands more across the world. The two-page color spread, spotted with pictures of cheering fans and men and women proudly wearing crimson jerseys, also points out that “more than 1,500 students participate in…athletics…and Harvard has 41 varsity athletic teams, more than any other Division I school in the country.” But all too often, it seems that the exuberance of Byerly Hall fades by the time it reaches the marble steps of University Hall. Indeed, the College administration is failing to provide adequate representation for the concerns of students who lead the grueling existence of top level student-athletes.

Athletics are part of Harvard’s undergraduate mission for good reason. Fierce bonds of friendship and loyalty are forged in the hours upon hours of training and practice, and alumni say that their years in a Harvard uniform produced some of the most memorable and formative moments in their lives. Home games are an opportunity to build community and school spirit, while road trips turn athletes into ambassadors who represent Harvard College around the world. Byerly Hall sees the advantage in the character of student athletes as Harvard specifically admits hundreds of athletes a year in its effort to piece together a “well-balanced student body.”

Student athletes have unique concerns. For instance, dining hall hours and shuttle schedules impact athletes’ practice-filled schedules dramatically. Academic policies disproportionately affect athletes, as they miss class more frequently than most students to play. From early morning practices to the biggest games of the year, student-athletes experience Harvard in a different scope, and College administrators would be well served to better inform their decisions relating to every aspect of student life.

Yet the specific interests of student-athletes are overlooked far too often. The crucial issue is that there exists little to no dialogue between the College administration and undergraduate athletes. This problem is exacerbated by athletes’ detachment from the traditional means of student advocacy. Meetings of preexisting student advocacy organizations frequently conflict with athletic commitments or time that athletes must use to catch up on academic work. Also, these organizations are charged with dealing with the general concerns of the entire student population, letting athlete-specific concerns fall through the cracks.

In contrast to Harvard’s lack of concern for student athletes, Columbia University recently took steps to allow student-athletes preference in choosing classes because of their busy schedules. Although such a system would not make sense at Harvard because of our shopping system, by recognizing the particular interests of student-athletes and acting to improve their conditions, Columbia established a model to be followed.

The difference between these two Ivy situations rests in the fact that Harvard’s athletes lack an outlet for their concerns. Columbia and other Ivies have active Student-Athlete Advisory Committees (SAAC) that regularly meet with college administrators. Harvard has its own SAAC, but for all its good work gauging athletic concerns, it is only connected to the Athletic Department administrators who have no direct authority over College or student life issues. Harvard’s SAAC has the potential to facilitate athletic concerns, but it has yet to reach its full potential as an intermediary between athletes and college life.

It is essential that University Hall recognize that not only should it be taking cues from the Undergraduate Council (UC), student groups, and the residential Houses, but also from student-athletes. We commend the UC for its eagerness to represent athletic concerns. Yet the disparity between student-athletes and their needs on campus begins with the disconnect between the various administrative offices on campus. For progress to be made, SAAC must be given an expanded role.

Harvard is an amazing place to be a student athlete—just ask any student who makes the sacrifices necessary to wear a jersey, singlet, unisuit, or jacket with “Harvard” stiched on it. But the separation between athletics and academics need not span the Charles. As University Hall reexamines its core curriculum and social programming, it ought to more clearly understand the athletic lifestyle and the ever-changing needs of student-athletes as well.

John F. Voith III ’07 is a special concentrator in Winthrop House and a member of the water polo team. Nathan T. Picarsic ’07 is a government concentrator in Kirkland House and co-chair of the Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.