Quote:
|
this [UC resolution to maintain the labelling of Extension School degrees] seems to be no different from all of the other turf battles that go on at Harvard regarding who gets to claim what status.
|
There is a clear difference. Unlike professors, students have no stake in who administrates or controls various programs at Harvard, because they graduate and leave the university in a few years' time. So they have no tangible "turf" to defend. What they are defending is very obvious: the integrity of the degree currency that they purchased. HES awards about 100 bachelor's degrees per year which is about 6 percent of the number at Harvard College. We have seen that the vast majority of those are not eager to specify their affiliation to the Extension School unless forced to, and may not be required to do so even on their CV's. Thus, as many as 1 out of 20 people representing themselves as Harvard baccalaureates may be non-self-differentiating HES folk.
The value of the Harvard degree being mostly in the admissions selectivity, 5-6 percent is a significant number. That's not including the ALM's, ALB students who don't graduate, and others of potential relevance to this issue. The number of Extension School ALB graduates boosts by 20-50 percent the population of ambiguously selected Harvard admits with bachelor's degrees (i.e. adding them to athletes, URM, legacy and development cases). That's enough to potentially erode the brand that the UC voters and their fellow students paid for in money and schoolwork. They are fighting to prevent counterfeits, not for "turf".