All Concentrations Are Created Equal

To some, there are only four impressive paths to a Harvard degree: major in Science, technology, engineering, or mathematics.

A recent op-ed illuminated a gap in department workloads along STEM/humanities lines, igniting a conversation on the value and rigor of various concentrations. The conversation extends past the numbers: I have heard my peers express that because I spend less time working on assignments in my field of study, my efforts and passions are less admirable.

But there is no reason why both Humanities and STEM fields cannot be valued equally.

The fact that one concentration takes up more time than another does not mean it will be more intellectually fulfilling, better prepare students for a career, or increase the likelihood that a student will go on to do more good in the world. In Harvard’s climate of prestige chasing, placing an overemphasis on some concentrations over others could push students away from what really interests them.

To begin to understand the value of a non-STEM education, one need simply examine the long history of Harvard’s excellence in such fields.

The contributions made by non-STEM Harvard graduates are extensive. W.E.B. Du Bois studied philosophy and became a founder of the NAACP. T.S. Eliot studied English and Philosophy before becoming a Nobel Prize-winning poet. And if that doesn’t convince you — Ketanji Brown Jackson ’92, who currently sits as a Supreme Court Justice, studied Government while at Harvard.

Make no mistake, the tireless work and never-ending hours that go into keeping afloat in a rigorous math or chemistry class deserve the utmost recognition. Furthermore, from life-saving research to game-changing technology, the work produced by STEM graduates can yield enormous good.

But it doesn’t have to be a competition.

When one field is made to seem more challenging or prestigious, another becomes a symbol of mediocrity by comparison. In a school rich in high-achieving students, people will always flock to what appears more impressive — nobody wants to be told that they are doing what is easy.

The average Harvard student’s insatiable greed for prestige warps our choices and can push us to choose concentrations perceived as more “worthy” — even when our true passions may lie elsewhere.

As a result, we might force ourselves into concentrations that dampen our love of learning. Sound familiar?

Predictably, choosing a forced path ultimately backfires. To thrive in incredibly demanding fields, you have to be fueled by fierce passion. At the end of the day, students should choose what excites them — why put in double the work for half the fulfillment?

So the next time you run into a bright-eyed friend rambling about a beloved psych course with only two hours of work a week, celebrate their vigor instead of snidely deriding their workload.

At Harvard, every student — regardless of how comparatively difficult or easy their concentration may be — has the potential to enact meaningful change. It would serve us well to remember that.

Chloe I. Goldberg ’28, a Crimson Editorial Editor, lives in Canaday Hall.