The Battle Over Class Sizes at Harvard: A Symptom of Deeper Labor Tensions
The recent clash between Harvard and its academic workers union over Expository Writing class sizes isn't just about numbers on a syllabus. It's a microcosm of a much larger struggle playing out across academia – the fight for fair treatment and sustainable workloads for non-tenure-track faculty.
A 50% Increase in Workload? That's Not Just a Number
On the surface, increasing class sizes from 10 to 15 students in a writing-intensive course might seem like a minor adjustment. But, as instructors point out, this represents a 50% increase in workload. Personally, I think this statistic is often overlooked. It's easy to dismiss it as a simple logistical change, but what it really signifies is a potential erosion of the quality of education.
What many people don't realize is that Expository Writing courses, particularly those designed for students needing extra support, thrive on individualized attention. Amy Hanes' observation about students building relationships alongside writing skills is crucial. Larger classes threaten this dynamic, potentially leaving students feeling lost in the crowd.
The Union's Frustration: A Pattern of Disregard
The union's frustration is palpable. They've been sounding the alarm about staffing shortages and their impact on course structure for over a year. J. Gregory Given's statement about the administration's refusal to engage substantively highlights a pattern of disregard that's all too common in labor disputes.
From my perspective, this isn't just about class sizes; it's about respect and recognition. The union represents over 2,600 workers, yet their concerns seem to be met with silence or token gestures. This raises a deeper question: how can universities claim to value education while simultaneously undermining the very people who deliver it?
The Broader Implications: A National Trend
This conflict at Harvard isn't an isolated incident. It's part of a national trend of universities increasingly relying on contingent faculty while offering them precarious employment and limited bargaining power. If you take a step back and think about it, this model is unsustainable. It leads to burnout, high turnover rates, and ultimately, a decline in educational quality.
The Human Cost: Anxiety and Uncertainty
Margaret Deli's words about instructor anxiety and uncertainty are particularly striking. The increased workload isn't just about grading more papers; it's about the emotional toll of feeling stretched too thin, of knowing you can't give each student the attention they deserve. This human cost is often overlooked in discussions about academic labor.
Looking Ahead: A Crossroads for Higher Education
The outcome of this dispute will have far-reaching consequences. If the National Labor Relations Board rules in favor of the union, it could set a precedent for stronger bargaining rights for academic workers nationwide. What this really suggests is that the fight at Harvard is about more than just class sizes; it's about redefining the relationship between universities and the people who make them function.
In my opinion, this is a pivotal moment for higher education. Will universities continue to prioritize cost-cutting measures over the well-being of their workforce and the quality of education? Or will they recognize the value of their non-tenure-track faculty and invest in a more sustainable and equitable model? The answer will shape the future of academia for generations to come.
