The Harvard Crimson - Volume CXLV, No. 105

The Harvard Crimson The University Daily, Est. 1873 | Volume CXLV, No. 105 | Cambridge, Massachusetts | Thursday, October 18, 2018

editorial PAGE 4

sports PAGE 6

news PAGE 3

A new lawsuit is likely to negatively affect the Harvard Law Review.

Harvard gears up for the second half of the Ivy League football season.

Author J. M. Coetzee wins prestigious humanities award from Harvard.

Private Emails Show Harvard Favors Those Who Fund It By delano r. franklin and samuel w. zwickel Crimson Staff Writers

Getting into Harvard is hard.

But it’s a lot less hard if your family promises to fund a new building, as suggested by internal emails presented in court on the third day of the Harvard admissions trial.

John M. Hughes, a lawyer for Students for Fair Admissions — the anti-affirmative action group suing the College over its race-conscious admissions policies — introduced the emails in a bid to prove Harvard unfairly prefers the wealthy and well-connected. Hughes read each missive aloud before grilling the College’s long-serving Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid William R. Fitzsimmons ’67 on its contents.

Hughes and Fitzsimmons faced off in court Wednesday as part of the high-stakes and high-profile trial in SFFA’s four-year-old suit alleging Harvard discriminates against Asian-American applicants.

The trial, which launched Oct. 15 in a Boston courthouse, will likely continue for three weeks — and, if the suit reaches the Supreme Court, could decide the fate of affirmative action in the United States.

The handful of emails — most of them sent between administrators and admissions officers ­

— hint at the College’s behindthe-scenes fondness for applicants whose admission yields certain practical perks. Hughes referenced the emails in an attempt to grill Fitzsimmons on the “Dean’s Interest List,” a special and confidential list of applicants Harvard compiles every admissions cycle. Though the University closely guards the details, applicants on that list are often related to or of interest to top donors — and court filings show list members benefit from a significantly inflated acceptance rate.

In one 2013 email headlined “My Hero,” former Dean of the Harvard Kennedy School David T. Ellwood ’75 thanked Fitzsimmons for his help admitting a set of students with very particular qualifications.

“Once again you have done wonders. I am simply thrilled about the folks you were able to admit,” Ellwood wrote in the email. “[Redacted] and [redacted] are all big wins. [Redacted] has already committed to a building.”

In a separate email Hughes presented, Associate Vice President for Alumni Affairs and Development Roger P. Cheever ’67 reflected on the pros and cons of another Harvard hopeful. This student’s family at one time donated $8.7 million to the

Harvard Admissions Trial Hits Day Three who and what:

­

The College’s long-serving dean of admissions and financial aid William R. Fitzsimmons ’67 remained on the witness stand Wednesday.

SFFA lawyer John M. Hughesgrilled Fitzsimmons first. Then a Harvard attorney stepped up.

See emails Page 5

Hughes sought to prove that Harvard unfairly favors the wealthy and well-connected in its admissons process.

Harvard lawyer William F. Lee ’72, meanwhile, asked Fitzsimmons to describe the way the College evaluates applicants.

The University’s General Counsel Robert W. Iuliano ‘83 exits the courthouse during a break in the trial. caleb d. schwartz—Crimson photographer

Students for Fair Admissions President Edward Blum checks his phone outside the courthouse on the third day of the Harvard admissions trial. caleb d. schwartz—Crimson photographer

Fitzsimmons also spoke about his time at Harvard in the 1970s.

T9 Reviewers Finalize ‘Interim’ Guidance Pressley Talks About Warren’s Ancestry By jamie d. halper Crimson Staff Writer

Three years after its inception, Harvard’s Title IX policy review committee has produced an “interim” report of findings and recommendations, according to Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Professor Donald H. Pfister, the committee’s chair.

Former University President Drew G. Faust created the committee in 2015 when Harvard continued to face criticisms of its policy and procedures on sexual misconduct after it overhauled them in 2014.

Title IX is a federal policy that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, and it underlies the school’s policies and

procedures for handling sexual misconduct.

Faust tasked the committee with examining how Harvard implements its sexual assault policies, analyzing data on investigations, and potentially recommending policy changes. The committee, comprised of faculty from across the University and undergraduate and graduate student representa-

tives, worked over the course of several years largely under the radar, evaluating the University’s practices regarding sexual misconduct and typically providing feedback directly to relevant administrators.

But after sexual misconduct allegations against prominent Harvard professors surfaced

See title IX Page 5

Economist Zucman Talks Tax Loopholes By sophia s. armenakas And sam e. sharfstein Crimson contributing Writers

University of California, Berkeley economist Gabriel Zucman discussed the detrimental impact of tax havens on the sustainability of globalization during the first lecture of the semesterly Seymour E. & Ruth B. Harris Lecture Series in Economics Wednesday.

Speaking to approximately 50 Harvard affiliates gathered in Science Center Hall D — predominantly graduate students and professors — Zucman highlighted how shifts in global

See zucman Page Inside this issue

Harvard Today 2

Lorem Ipsum sit amet, adipiscing elit. Aene sfdgafd asdfasd fasdf asdfasd fasdfasdfasdf asd fasdfasdfadsfan eget dolor. First M. Last—Crimson photographer

News 3

Editorial 4

Sports 6

Today’s Forecast

rainy High: 55 Low: 51

By andrew j. zucker Crimson Staff Writer

Ayanna S. Pressley, a progressive Boston politician and the presumed representative for Massachusetts’s 7th Congressional District, spoke about Elizabeth Warren and sexual assault at a college media roundtable Wednesday.

Pressley defeated incumbent Michael E. Capuano in the September Democratic primary, and will run unopposed in November. She will become the first African American to represent the state in the U.S. House of Representatives.

At the roundtable, Pressley discussed Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren’s recent release of genetic analysis supporting her claim to distant Native American ancestry, a claim President Donald Trump has repeatedly mocked. Pressley said rhetoric surrounding Warren’s Native American ancestry deflects attention from more important conversations.

During Warren’s time as a professor at Harvard Law School, she claimed minority status. However, Warren insists she never used her Native American ancestry to further her career.

“She’s not ever claimed membership. She is simply proving ancestry, which is different,” Pressley said. “Her hand was ultimately forced to do that to defend herself. But this is some-

thing that Trump does very well.

This is a complete distraction, just like his birther argument around Barack Obama.

It’s a distraction from the real issues.”

When asked if she believed it was politically smart for Warren — a likely 2020 presidential candidate — to release her DNA test results just weeks before the midterm elections, Pressley said she has not heard voters care about the issue.

“I’ve been on the ground in some of these other states, and when I’m spending time with people on their front porches, or around their living rooms, or at early vote polling locations in Georgia, for example, no one is talking about this,” she said.

“This is some...very small universe of people, it’s been my experience, that are hyper-focused on this.”

Also during the discussion, Pressley said while in Congress, she would work to secure funding for anti-sexual violence organizations at the local level.

“I want to caution us, because I think with national movements like Enough Is Enough and Time’s Up and Me Too that you can be so connected to the national part of it, but the work is going to happen on the local level in cities and states,” she said.

“What I will be fighting for

See Pressley Page 3

Visit thecrimson.com.

Follow @TheCrimson on Twitter.

cheesy bread

THE HARVARD CRIMSON |

sEPTEMBER 18, 2018

Page 2

Harvard Today

For Lunch Buffalo Chicken Pizza Chicken Stir-Fry with Peapods Hummus Florentine Sandwich

For Dinner Chicken Marsala Mussels in White Wine Portobello Lentil Patty Gnocchi with Butternut and Sage

Today’s Events

in The Real World

Media and Marketing Expo Cabot Science Library, 4:00 p.m.

Treasury Official Charged with Leaking Documents Related to Russia Probe

Considering a career in advertising, marketing, journalism, fashion, and more? Whether you’re interested in a summer internship or seeking a full-time job, drop by to meet with employers and discuss your interests.

Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, a senior Treasury Department employee, was charged yesterday with leaking confidential reports about suspicious transactions regarding the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. This move marks an effort by the Trump administration to expose leakers in the government.

Datamatch 2019 Intro Meeting Emerson Hall 108, 7:00 p.m.

Your wingman duties don’t have to end when cuffing season does. Attend the intro meeting to learn more about how to join this year’s Datamatch team. If you’re considering tech, stats, marketing, management, or business, Datamatch has a spot for you!

Hamlet in the Loeb Ex Loeb Ex Theater, 8:00 p.m.

The only thing better than Hamlet is a version produced by our fellow peers.

Come by to watch a modern rendition with projections, music, and digital media. Can’t make it today? The Loeb Ex also offers showings on the 19th and 20th, so be sure not to miss it!

Record Number Crossing U.S. Border as Trump Threatens New Crackdown Joseph Fronczak led a “Gangster for Capitalism” workshop. Chloe I. Yu —Crimson photographer

Daily Briefing John M. Hughes, a lawyer for Students for Fair Admissions — the antiaffirmative action group suing the College over its race-conscious admissions policies — introduced emails in court Wednesday in a bid to prove Harvard unfairly prefers the wealthy and well-connected. Hughes referenced the emails to grill Fitzsimmons on the “Dean’s Interest List,” a special and confidential list of applicants Harvard compiles every admissions cycle.

In other news, three years after its inception, Harvard’s Title IX policy review committee has produced an “interim” report of findings and recommendations.

Since the move to end family separation at the border, the number of immigrant families entering the U.S. has soared to record highs. In September, 16,658 families were arrested by Border Patrol agents — the highest one-month total on record.

The Trump administration faces a growing challenge of enforcing previous goals of a stop to illegal immigration.

Pompeo Meets Turkey’s Erdogan Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has stated that Saudi Arabia has pledged to hold senior officials accountable for any relation to the disappearance of Saudi writer Jamal Khashoggi. On a visit to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2nd, Khashoggi mysteriously disappeared, followed by reports speculating about his death.

Around the Ivies princeton Six Princeton students have sought treatment for Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease according to the Daily Princetonian. The student body received a campus alert about the cases of HFMD and information about symptoms. The Director of Medical Services urged students to wash their hands frequently and to avoid contact with infected students.

UPENN Undergraduate and graduate students receiving significant financial aid at the University of Pennsylvania will now have specialized financial aid counselors, according to the Daily Pennsylvanian. This marks a divergence from the previous system, in which Student Financial Services assigned students to counselors alphabetically. This change was spurred by student feedback. Counselors will now receive specialized training to meet the specific questions posed by the students they are advising.

CORNELL Cornell law professor, Robert Hockett, worked with Sen. Bernie Sanders in crafting “Too-Big to Fail” Legislation, according to the Cornell Sun. Hockett’s research is focused on organizational, financial, and monetary law and economics. The bill would call upon some of Wall Street’s largest firms to downsize. These firms would not be able to access federal bailout facilities until they do so.

The University Daily, Est. 1873

The Harvard Crimson Derek G. Xiao President Hannah Natanson Managing Editor Nathan Y. Lee Business Manager

Associate Managing Editors Mia C. Karr ’19 Claire E. Parker ’19 Associate Business Managers Dahlia S. Huh ’19 Max W. Sosland ’19 Digital Strategists Jamie D. Halper ’20 Caroline S. Engelmayer ’20 Editorial Chairs Cristian D. Pleters ’19 Emmanuel R. R. D’Agostino ’19

Staff for This Issue Arts Chairs Mila Gauvini II ’19 Grace Z. Li ’19

Design Chairs Morgan J. Spaulding ’19 Simon S. Sun ’19

FM Chairs Marella A. Gayla ’19 Leah S. Yared ’19

Multimedia Chairs Amy Y. Li ’20 Ellis J. Yeo ’20

Blog Chairs Lydia L. Cawley ’20 Stuti Telidevara ’20

Technology Chairs Nenya A. Edjah ’20 Theodore T. Liu ’20

Sports Chairs Cade S. Palmer ’20 Jack R. Stockless ’19

Copyright 2018, The Harvard Crimson (USPS 236-560). No articles, editorials, cartoons or any part thereof appearing in The Crimson may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of the President. The Associated Press holds the right to reprint any materials published in The Crimson. The Crimson is a non-profit, independent corporation, founded in 1873 and incorporated in 1967. Second-class postage paid in Boston, Massachusetts. Published Monday through Friday except holidays and during vacations, three times weekly during reading and exam periods by The Harvard Crimson Inc., 14 Plympton St., Cambridge, Mass. 02138 Weather icons made by Freepik, Yannick, Situ Herrera, OCHA, SimpleIcon, Catalin Fertu from flaticon.com is licensed by CC BY 3.0.

Night Editor Joshua J. Florence ’19

Design Editor Morgan J. Spaulding ’19

Assistant Night Editors Delano R. Franklin ’21 Edith M. Herwitz ’20

Photo Editors Brenda Lu ’20 Chloe I. Yu ’21

Story Editors Graham W. Bishai ’19 Brittany N. Ellis ’19 Hannah Natanson ’19 Claire E. Parker ’19 Alison W. Steinbach ’19

Editorial Editor Caleb J. Esrig ’20 Sports Editor Spencer R. Morris ’20

Corrections The Harvard Crimson is committed to accuracy in its reporting. Factual errors are corrected promptly on this page. Readers with information about errors are asked to e-mail the managing editor at managingeditor@thecrimson.com.

Page 3

THE HARVARD CRIMSON | october 18, 2018

Pressley From Page 1

zucman From Page 1

Event at HDS Joins Science, Theology

Pressley Speaks to Reporters [at] the federal level is an investment in those organizations doing that work, because

The first time I received hate mail was when I disclosed I was a survivor of campus sexual assault.

Ayanna S. Pressley Democratic Nominee for MA-7

more people are disclosing now than ever before. But organizations like the Victim Rights

Law Center don’t have the pro-bono legal counsel to support these survivors in getting the justice they deserve,” she added.

During her time on the Boston City Council, Pressley disclosed that she was raped in college. She has also previously said she survived childhood sexual abuse.

Pressley addressed her experiences during the discussion.

“I’ve worked on a lot of polarizing, controversial, third rail issues, but the first time I received hate mail was when I disclosed I was a survivor of campus sexual assault,” she said.

“I don’t regret having disclosed, because it is a transcendent issue. It is pervasive.

It does not discriminate. And every day someone approaches me in a restroom, at a fancy fundraiser, in the halls of City Hall, walking the street, to say thank you for telling your story, it is my story too.” andew.zucke@thecrimson.com.

Like The Crimson

on Facebook.

By connor w. k. brown and amy. li contributing Writers

Gabriel Zucman, an Assistant Professor at UC Berkeley, speaks about globalization, taxes, and inequality in Science Center Hall D Wednesday afternoon. Photo: Karina G. Gonzalez-Espinoza

Globalization Topic of UC Berkley Professor Lecture profits distort competition, exacerbate inequality, and decrease tax revenue in nations with low tax rates, so called “tax havens.”

He characterized U.S. multinational corporations as “particularly aggressive in shifting to tax havens.”

Of the 40 percent of global multinational profits shifted to tax havens in 2016, U.S. based corporations were responsible for half, according to Zucman.

He explained that these tax shifts result in increased income for wealthy shareholders and large tax revenues for the “haven” nations but place a burden on nations with higher tax rates.

“I think globalization, as it’s working today, is unlikely to be very sustainable if its main winners pay less and less in taxes and the rest of

the population who doesn’t benefit from it has to pay, has to pay more,” Zucman said.

Zucman said in an interview after the lecture that he was motivated to give the talk in order to emphasize the social and economic dangers of the current tax structures.

He said he also wanted to invite people to think about policy solutions and further research.

“If we don’t address these questions properly, then the risk is to see a rise in protectionism, in nationalism, a retreat from openness, a retreat from globalization, rising inequality, and all sorts of tensions between countries that can just end up very bad for the world,” Zucman said.

Senan Hogan-Hennessy, a research assistant at the Business School, said he came to the event because he was

interested in Zucman’s focus on inequality.

He said he was very impressed by Zucman’s presentation and his answers to the many questions posed by professors throughout the lecture.

“His answers to the questions were fantastic, like the professors here always jump in and grill the speakers, and he was just great at answering them,” Hogan-Hennessy said.

The Economics Department hosts the Harris Lecture series once each semester.

In the last year, speakers have included Hélène Rey from the London Business School and Magne Mogstad from the University of Chicago in Spring 2018 and Fall 2017, respectively.

J.M. Coetzee Receive Inagural Mahindra Award By joshua s. archibald and james s. bikales Contributing Writers

Nobel Prize-winning author J.M. Coetzee received the inaugural Mahindra Award for Global Distinction in the Humanities in a Sanders Theatre ceremony Wednesday afternoon.

Bookended by Bach solos by noted pianist Stephen Prutsman, the ceremony included an appearance by University President Lawrence S. Bacow and a discussion among 11 distinguished humanities scholars.

The award, named after Anand G. Mahindra ’77 and his wife Anuradha Mahindra, was created this year to “celebrate the work and vision of an internationally renowned public figure whose career has contributed significantly to the flourishing of the arts and humanities,” Homi K. Bhabha, director of the Mahindra Center for the Humanities, said in his introductory remarks.

The award will be presented every two years.

I really enjoyed... how they were able to weave together Bach, bicyles, and Roget’s Theasurus in such a fluent manner.

Andrew M. Burlile

Bhabha called Coetzee a “foundational writer of the century because he shakes our foundations.”

Emphasizing Coetzee’s “slow-burning moral courage,” Bhabha called the author’s works “classics.”

Coetzee, 78, grew up in a white family in South Africa under apartheid.

His first book, “Dusklands,” published in 1974, explores the psychological effects of conflict.

He has won the pretigious

J.M. Coetzeewas presented with the Mahindra Award for Global Distinction in the Humanities. griffin r. anres—Crimson photographer

Booker Prize twice — for “Life & Times of Michael K” and “Disgrace” — in addition to the 2003 Nobel Prize for Literature.

Bhabha said the award itself, which was sculpted by Sir Anish M. Kapoor in the shape of a jagged mountain with many peaks and valleys, represents the lifelong journey undertaken by its recipients.

“It is a long treacherous trek up until you reach the view from the top,” Bhabha said.

Bacow, in presenting the award, thanked Coetzee “for seeking summits through your craft and opening vistas through your work.”

In his acceptance speech, Coetzee noted the influence of

reading the British “Children’s Encyclopædia” throughout his childhood, asking the audience, “What does it mean to have a mother tongue, and are there motherless people?”

He said he has not yet come to terms with his own mother tongue, English.

The subsequent roundtable discussion between humanities scholars and artists began with Bhabha posing Coetzee’s question to each of the participants.

The panel featured English Professors Stephen J. Greenblatt and Elaine Scarry, African and African American Studies and English Professor Jamaica Kincaid, Music Department Chair Suzannah E.

Clark, and History Professor Nancy F. Cott.

The panelists discussed the virtues of and relationships between three of Coetzee’s favor-

It is a long treacherous trek up until you reach the view from the top.

Homi K. Bhabha Director of Mahindra Center for Humanities

ite things: bicycles, Bach and Roget’s Thesaurus.

Kincaid, who said she does

not use a thesaurus, clashed with the other authors on the value of the tool, but admitted she had purchased eight in preparation for the event.

“I really enjoyed…how they were able to weave together Bach, bicycles, and Roget’s Thesaurus in such a fluent manner,” Allston resident Andrew M. Burlile, who attended the lecture, said.

Heather Baird, an Extension School student, said she has previously read several of Coetzee’s works.

“The speech only increased his mystery for me,” she said.

“His writing is already cryptic, talking about the abstract parts of human relations.”

At Harvard Divinity School Wednesday night, students, faculty and members of the public gathered to do what the Divinity School does well — get philosophical. Their pursuit: forming a better understanding of humans’ relationship to the natural world and imagining how it might evolve in the future.

The event, titled “Taproot: Stories of Nature & Restoration,” was put on by the Constellation Project, and convened thinkers from a variety of backgrounds, who spoke about everything from indigenous communities, to religion, to mental health, each in relation to nature and humans’ complex relationship with it.

Stacy A. Bare, one of the headlining speakers, spoke to the audience about being an Iraq war veteran who struggled with addiction and suicidality after returning to the U.S. Bare said the outdoors saved his life, and today he has dedicated his life to encouraging people to explore nature.

Bare spoke alongside Prathima Muniyappa, a researcher at the MIT Media Lab; and Andrew Nalani, a Steinhardt Doctoral Fellow at New York University. All three storytellers spoke about their own relationships with nature and spirituality.

During her presentation, Muniyappa discussed a new project that aims to reconcile cultural and ritual practices with the escalating expansion of human settlements. As part of her work with the MIT Media Lab, Muniyappa wants to “build a database where ritual knowledge is treated the same way as scientific knowledge”.

The event was led by Dr. Samuel S. Myers ’87, Director of the Planetary Health Alliance and research scientist at the Harvard School of Public Health, and Terry Tempest Williams, author and current writer-in-residence at the Divinity School.“We brought together three powerful storytellers,” Williams said in an interview before the event.

“At the root of this is trauma. Trauma of war, trauma of loss of the natural world, trauma of violence of all kinds,” Williams said. “Tonight we are really looking at these stories and how they can lead us to a place of restoration.”

The Constellation Project was born out of a 2016 encounter between Myers and Williams. What followed was a two year long conversation, often over tea, between the two scholars about separatism among academics “where scientists don’t talk to theologians who don’t talk to humanists, who don’t talk to business people who don’t talk to attornesy or people in public policy.”

At the core of the project’s inception, for Myers, was the realization that humans’ relationship to the Earth was in crisis.

“Underneath that environmental crisis and that public health crisis, maybe there is actually a spiritual crisis — that there seems to be something fundamentally broken in our relationship to nature,” Myers said. “How is it okay to treat our atmosphere and our oceans as gigantic garbage dumps? What makes it acceptable to drive species extinct 1000 times faster than normal? ”In an open discussion after the speakers finished, attendees commented on how the event had changed their perspective on science, nature and spirituality.

“I think it’s cool how they implemented public health, spirituality, and the environmental movement as a whole” Rachel D. Levy ’21 said. “Make people care a little bit more, step away from the science which is there and reestablish that personal connection with nature”.

Wiliams said that next semester the Constellation Project will be exploring climate by inviting elders from Greenland and Polynesia to try to find common ground between their experiences as “human in place.”

“What I hope people come away with is a little discomfort, some sparks, some new ideas, hopefully an interest in engaging in this conversation in the longer term,” Myers said.

THE HARVARD CRIMSON | October 18, 2018

Page4

Editorial The Crimson Editorial board

column

Diversity Under the Law

Trump’s Monetary Policy is Confused

FASORP is in the wrong to sue the Law Review

W

hile Harvard College gears up for a lawsuit on its undergraduate admissions process, the Harvard Law Review is facing a similar lawsuit. Filed by Texas-based group Faculty, Alumni, and Students Opposed to Racial Preferences, the new suit alleges that the publication uses discriminatory procedures when selecting new members.

FASORP argues that the Law Review’s selection process, which in certain cases takes into account gender, violates Title VI and Title IX. We believe that this lawsuit threatens the First Amendment rights of the Harvard Law Review and is a disturbing attack on a student extracurricular.

FASORP argues that the Law Review’s selection process, which in certain cases takes into account gender, violates Title VI and Title IX. FASORP has thus far failed to provide concrete evidence that the Harvard Law Review discriminated against students of a certain race by admitting underqualified editors.

Merely incorporating race and gender into a holistic admissions process, as the Law Review does, is eminently constitu-

tional, and is a goal of affirmative action that aims not to favor one race or gender over another — it is to encourage diversity and openness in institutions that have historically been dominated by members of a privileged race or gender.

If anything, the Law Review demonstrates the effectiveness of this policy.

Prior to implementing its new admissions policy, the Law Review had never elected a majority-female class.

Since expanding its affirmative action policy in 2013 to include gender, the Harvard Law Review has reached a milestone by electing its most diverse class in its history 2016 and the first ever female majority class in 2017.

Moreover, the law does not impact everyone equally. Gender, class and race affect how the law is applied and who it protects; a diverse class of writers is necessary to encapsulate the lived experiences of all Americans.

Just as we have stood by affirmative action in admissions processes, we support the Law Review’s current policy in admitting members and choosing articles.

The Law Review is hardly alone in recognizing the need for diverse perspectives. The New York University Law Review, another target of FASORP, also considers race, gender, or other background experiences in its holistic admissions process.

This policy is in line with the Grutter v. Bollinger decision in 2003 that upheld

affirmative action; we are thus skeptical of FASORP’s claim that it is discriminatory under the law.

FASORP’s lawsuit is likely to bring disastrous effects to the Law Review if it successful, undoing the publication’s newfound diversity.

Just as we have stood by affirmative action in admissions processes, we support the Law Review’s current policy.

This would be more than a minor setback. Diversity in law schools, and their communities, affect how the law is interpreted and applied, and the law affects everyone.

The Law Review therefore can, and should, give access to voices that represent us all.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

Michael gritzbach—Crimson photographer

Op-ed

You’re Miss California, Right?

By Annie J. Lu

E

ven before I took my first step into Harvard, people knew who I was: the pageant girl.

They say the cure for sexism is education, that the more educated people are, the more aware and the less judgmental they act. Yet, my experience at Harvard, the pinnacle of academic and intellectual curiosity, has largely been the opposite.

In fact, I have never been in an environment more permeated with sexism than Harvard.

I’ve competed in scholarship pageants for the past five years, and can say with complete certainty that I am who I am today because I made the bold move to step out of my comfort zone and compete in my first pageant. As an insecure 13 year-old girl so shy that I was not even able to ask the librarian for a book, I competed in my first pageant watching “Toddlers and Tiaras,” where girls are depicted as catty and superficial, as preparation and ready to answer every question with two words: “world peace.” However, when I came to pageant weekend, I quickly realized how wrong I was. My fellow competitors were some of the most genuine and accomplished people I’ve ever met, creating a sisterhood of girls throughout the nation. In that weekend, I had an epiphany when a middle aged man came up to me, a newcomer that no one knew, and exclaimed how impressed he was with my performance of Flight of the Bumblebee on the piano; because a stranger had faith in me, I began to have faith in myself.

I love competing in pageants; it is a platform that fosters women’s empowerment for countless girls across the nation as it did for me, teaching the power of embracing femininity and building self-confidence. But ever since joining

the Harvard community, something I absolutely loved has become something I’m ambivalent about. The misconception of pageant girls being catty and superficial is held even more adamantly by intellectuals. Thus, an activity I love doing is also a double-edged sword, becoming something that has caused my peers, both male and female, to discount their respect of me and their belief in my academic capabilities.

Freshman fall can be summed up with the sentence, “Hey, what’s your name?” However, whenever someone asks me that question, it is a conversation I dread because the immediate response is always “Oh, you’re Miss California

I am Miss California, but I am also Annie Lu, the social activist. right?” Yes, you are indeed correct; I am Miss California, but I am also Annie Lu, the social activist. I am also Annie Lu, the girl who loves debating and learning about foreign policy. I am also Annie Lu, the social entrepreneur who runs her own nonprofit. In fact, I found myself during Opening Days explaining to one guy why not all pageant girls are “dumb and materialistic” and why “I deserve to be here.”

This problem transcends pageants.

It is about the toxic culture of judgment prevalent at this school. Although I embrace my femininity through pageants, beauty, and fashion, I can’t help but notice the fact that every day I have to take an extra step to show that I didn’t get here simply because of my face; I have to prove that I’m “actually smart.”

At Harvard, many of us are given

one label that defines us: a visor that obstructs the vision of others to see our multifaceted characters, boxing our personalities into only one idea. For me, this is “the pageant girl.” Coming from a place where my academic abilities and achievements were never questioned or doubted, I’ve realized that at the intellectual environment of Harvard, people are extremely quick to judge others. Yet, when we decide to see our peers only through a singular lens, it creates a one-dimensional community.

Specifically, there is a fine line between being feminine and being respected, a misogynistic dichotomy rooted in the culture of intellect and perpetuated by both men and women that equates femininity with being less capable, driven, and accomplished. At this school, this toxic judgment stemming from our obsession with exclusivity and filtering the “inferior” out is manifested in every aspect of college life, whether that be the sexism in final clubs, the competitive comp process for clubs, or even the Smyth Classics Library that only lets you swipe in if you’re in the Classics Department.

Why is it that for women, beauty and intelligence have to be mutually exclusive? Why is it that my love for beauty and fashion has to come at the expense of respect? Why is it that at Harvard, we can’t see and relate to each other simply as people, unique and deserving each in our own way?

Perhaps it’s just the nature of being in an elite institution. But at the same time, it is also a mindset we can actively work to change in order to make Harvard a more inclusive and open-minded community.

—Annie J. Lu ’22, a Crimson Editorial comper, lives in Weld Hall.

Henry N. Brooks Socially Liberal, Fiscally Liberal

I

t was strange watching a Republican president criticize the Federal Reserve for its latest interest rate hike (the Board of Governors voted to raise the rate by a quarter-percent to 2.25).

Gone were the days of a laissez-faire GOP lauding small government and market efficiency (though I already suspected this). The thought that government might exit the money market was now a “crazy” idea — a “mistake.”

Trump’s lament makes sense from the standpoint of GOP strategy. The economy is entering a tenth year of growth despite signs emerging of a looming slowdown.

With congressional Republicans highly exposed going into the midterms and the White House up for grabs in two years, President Donald Trump has every reason to want to keep money moving. For stock prices to keep rising and unemployment to stay low, dollars need to be chasing dollars (profit in a nutshell).

That becomes tougher (at least in theory) when the cost of borrowing rises. Firms can’t source funds as easily. People get stuck in smaller homes and old cars. All because money is staying at the bank where it earns interest.

Add to all this that Trump can’t punish the interest-rate decision makers (the Fed’s governors have fixed fourteen-year terms) and his narrative ties out.

In the Trumpian calculus, this is a classic moment of elites bulldozing the common man. It’s the same rule-by-experts that has drawn the ire of populists globally.

I have misgivings about the technicals of Trump’s analysis. The effective Fed funds rate is still ultra-low by historical standards. Current rates seem to be pricing in growth expectations more than inflation anxiety. The yield curve — a visualization of interest rates offered on different-length bonds — looks finally to be steepening (a refreshing change from the old talk of “inversion,” which most economists take as a sign of oncoming recession).

In other words, the higher interest rate is not only not a reason to panic; it’s actually a sign of health.

But I have other misgivings too — more in the way of principle. It’s extremely unusual for a sitting president to bully the Fed, which is politically neutral by its charter, into pursuing a particular monetary policy.

The only other instance we know of is Richard Nixon, whose back-room “arm-twisting” came out under warrant.

It also reads like plutocracy for a president to defend the Fed’s bond buyback program — which was designed to relieve the major banks of $800 billion of debt after the Great Recession — while slimming down spending on welfare, disaster relief, and the arts.

Perhaps most jarring though is trying to situate Trump in a tradition of free marketeers, as Republicans so often present themselves. I myself tried locating Trump’s comments alongside Ronald Reagan’s sermons against government intervention, George H. W. Bush’s promises to stonewall new taxes, and Mitt Romney’s talk of an over-dependent “47 percent” (a jab directed at Americans who collect government benefits without paying income tax). Trump’s comments seemed to lay bare a kind of two-facedness in the party.

There is the distinct sense, hearing Trump speak on the economy, that we are living on the ruins of a bygone Republican civilization. Radical individualism and corporate interest are all that’s left of the old pillars. Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake, and — bar an upset in Texas’s November Senate race — Ted Cruz are its custodians.

It can be easy in that environment to spar over the technicals of governance, where the Republicans are more obviously exposed.

These retorts often feel too self-assured, though. They ignore the real undergirding questions of economics, which are as much about society’s value frameworks — how we assess justice in process and outcome — as about the S&P 500’s daily close.

Whether it is “good” policy for the Fed to continue flooding the economy with dollars and lapping up securities is not a settled question. Trump has been clear that he views the balance sheet reduction as dangerous to continued prosperity.

There are reasons to be skeptical of that position. Trump is implicitly advocating for longterm intervention in money markets — in other words, a new era of government distorting economic outcomes in favor of large financial institutions. The question of economic “values” is obviously relevant here.

I happen to think, like the Fed governors, that quantitative easing has run its course and that ending it will not stifle productivity. I also place a premium on a culture of corporate responsibility, which I worry we’ve watered down with a decade of government buybacks. For their part, many investors seem to side with Trump, perhaps hoping for a weak dollar in the long-term.

What we’re left with is a split democracy: One for the people; the other for the shareholders.

—Henry N. Brooks ’19 is a Social Studies concentrator in Currier House. His column appears on alternate Thursdays.

Page 5

THE HARVARD CRIMSON | october 18, 2018

title ix From Page 1

emails From Page 1

Comm. Sends Title IX Report to Bacow

Emails Show Boost for Donor Children

Donald H. Pfister, the Harvard Asa Gray Professor of Systematic Botany, is the chair of a committee reviewing Harvard’s Title IX Policy. Chloe I. Yu — Crimson photographer Rebecca D. Robbins

last spring — and as the #MeToo movement swept the country — Pfister said Faust expanded the group’s purview to address power dynamics in faculty relationships and other issues.

The new report — which has not been made public — contains findings and recommendations on both the initial charges and the added tasks, Pfister said. He added that the group particularly considered how the University can build a Title IX system that students trust.

“One of the big issues of all of this is thinking about trust and how to build and create an atmosphere where there’s trust both in the people and in the system,” he said.

The report was not ready in time for the conclusion of Faust’s tenure at the end of June, but it reached University President Lawrence S. Bacow’s desk after he assumed the role.

Pfister said it will be up to Bacow whether to release it to the University as a whole.

University Spokesperson Melodie Jackson wrote in an emailed statement that Bacow now has the report and is considering next steps.

“President Bacow has received the interim report, and he plans to consult with others across the university, including students, as he gives careful consideration to the report and the best next steps for the University,” Jackson wrote.

She did not respond to questions about whether Bacow has reviewed the report yet or intends to release it publicly.

Pfister said one portion of the report addresses power dynamics between senior faculty and students or faculty mem-

bers of lower rank. Concerns arose about these skewed dynamics in spring 2018 when 18 women came forward and accused Government Professor Jorge I. Dominguez of acts of sexual misconduct spanning decades. In May, The Crimson reported that Economics Professor Roland G. Fryer was also under investigation for sexual misconduct and had been barred from his lab.

Pfister said the committee recommended that the University inform faculty about how to conduct relationships with each other in a professional setting.

“One of the things that we did was a survey across the schools: what’s the message that the school is giving to their faculty about appropriate interactions,” he said.

“We found that sometimes they were hard to find — these guidelines — and sometimes they were . . kind of inconsistent across the schools so we made some suggestions about that.”

University Provost Alan M. Garber ’76 announced in the spring that an online Title IX training module will be mandatory for all faculty this year.

Administrators also mandated Title IX training — offered online or in person — for all College students.

The training saw a 100 percent completion rate after it was tied to course enrollment for the first time this year.

The University’s Title IX Office also created a new brochure teaching faculty how to handle Title IX violation disclosures brought to them, according to University Title IX Officer Nicole M. Merhill.

Merhill said new Title IX initiatives stem from feedback

from a wide range of sources including the policy review committee, feedback forms at the end of online training modules, and surveys.

“When we’re developing resources across campus it’s a collaborative effort,” she said.

The policy review committee also focused on how to address actions that fall in the Title IX policy’s gray areas, Pfister said.

Gray areas are situations that may not qualify as Title IX violations but might still cause “atmospheres that aren’t healthy” and warrant further examination, he said. He said the committee suggested creating workshops and trainings to promote intervention before incidents occur.

Pfister said the committee has also discussed potential Title IX guideline changes from the federal government. U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos announced last fall that she was revoking some Obamaera Title IX guidance, and in late August a set of revised rules was leaked to the press. DeVos has yet to release the official rules, but if they are anything like the preliminary set, they could force significant changes to Harvard’s existing Title IX policies and procedures.

Pfister said that when — not if — there are changes at the federal level, the committee would take them up and determine how they might impact the University’s policies.

For this reason, Pfister said the committee will continue its work, even after producing this report.

“I think the work of the committee is going to be ongoing because of this shifting sand that any changes in the legis-

lation or the recommendations that come down from Betsy DeVos will have to be looked at and evaluated,” he said.

The report also addressed how the architecture of new construction projects across the University might impact the sexual climate on campus, how phone apps might be used to connect students with Title IX resources, and how to build peer support systems, Pfister said.

Though the committee only produced this report recently, Pfister said the group does much of its studying and recommending on a rolling basis.

“We are given no deadlines, we’re not told you have to report on ‘X’ date,” he said. “As we talk good ideas can surface and those good ideas can be taken home and be implemented or thought about for implementation.”

One such proposal recommended a shift in the language used in Title IX investigation reports.

Pfister said the committee read a number of anonymized reports in the early stages of its tenure and suggested the Title IX officers make an effort to clarify the reports’ language and refrain from using highly legalistic phrases.

Pfister said the committee was scheduled to hold its first meeting of the semester this week, but that two of its four student seats may not be filled in time. The committee currently consists of Pfister, faculty representatives from eight of Harvard’s schools, Deputy Provost Peggy E. Newell, and two students — a graduate and undergraduate student. jamie.halper@thecrimson.com.

­ niversity — but more recent U years had proven “challenging.” “‘[Redacted] was a devoted [redacted] Chair and generous donor,” the email read. “Going forward, I don’t see a significant opportunity for further major gifts. [Redacted] had an art collection which conceivably could come our way.”

Cheever closed the email by noting he would “call it a 2” — an apparent attempt to score the applicant-and-donation package. After Hughes asked Fitzsimmons to explain the number, the dean said the “2” ranking meant the candidate would receive a boost in the admissions process.

Fitzsimmons described the boost given to a “2” applicant as “reasonably serious,” though not as significant as the preference given to a “1” candidate.

The dean previously admitted in pre-trial testimony that greater “financial contribution[s]” can lead to higher ratings for individual applicants.

Yet another email Hughes read aloud offered a window into how Harvard courts candidates whose families have deep ties to the University — and even deeper pockets.

After the family of an unidentified applicant donated $1.1 million to the school, former head tennis coach David R. Fish ’72 treated that candidate to a special tour of campus. He later wrote to Fitzsimmons describing the visit.

“It would mean a great deal to [redacted] and to [redacted] to see [redacted] at Harvard,” Fish wrote. “Thus we rolled out the red carpet and were all delighted that [redacted] had a great time.”

The public has long suspected that Harvard favors those who fund it. But blatant examples like those presented Wednesday — the promised building, the “conceivable” art collection — rarely if ever become public knowledge.

The interest in the courtroom was palpable. When Hughes displayed the emails on television screens at the front of the room, dozens of spectators in the chamber leaned forward in their seats.Attendees seemed equally riveted by Hughes’s questions about the dean’s interest list.

Apart from a few Harvard insiders, no one knew that list existed until summer 2018, when it bubbled up in court documents released as part of the suit. The filings show that Harvard applicants who make the list are frequently related to “high-priority” individuals who boast close University connections — such as donors or “other influential alumni.”

Harvard has been tightlipped about who earns a spot on that list and why. On Wednesday, Hughes pressed for answers. He asked Fitzsimmons whether the list includes the “children of donors” and “other relatives of donors.”

“It could be,” Fitzsimmons said.

The sights and sounds of Harvard.

The Crimson @crimson_photo

Hughes also grilled Fitzsimmons on how applicants wind up on the dean’s list. Fitzsimmons said the University Development Office — an office that solicits alumni donations — sometimes offers names to the dean.

Summer court filings suggested the dean regularly sits down with Development Office employees and senior admissions staff to discuss applicants.

Fitzsimmons defended Harvard’s special treatment of applicants related to top donors as “important for the long-term strength of the institution.” He said this tactic secures funding for scholarships, among other things.Despite its low profile, the dean’s interest list has helped shape Harvard admissions for at least the past half-decade.

Documents published in June revealed that 192 current Harvard seniors — more than 10 percent of the Class of 2019 — are members of the dean’s list or the “Director’s List,” a similarly select group of applicants compiled by Director of Admissions Marlyn E. McGrath ’70 every year.

Students on the twin lists make up 9.34 percent of Harvard admits across six years — ranging from the Class of 2014 through the Class of 2019 — according to the June filings. The admission rate for members of the dean’s and director’s lists during this time period clocked in at 42.2 percent, more than nine times the overall acceptance rate for the Class of 2022.

Students on these lists also see certain opportunities — such as staff interviews in the admissions office — that others do not, according to court filingsCollege spokesperson Rachael Dane wrote in an emailed statement in August that students on both the dean’s and director’s lists compete in the “same rigorous admissions process” as do all other Harvard applicants.

“The Dean’s interest list is inclusive of all applicants who the Dean of Admissions wishes to keep track of during the admissions process, whether they be children of donors, or an applicant the Dean met at some point in their high school career and wished to keep an eye on,” Dane wrote.

SFFA has noted that students who appear on the two lists — along with legacy students, recruited athletes, and children of Harvard faculty members — are overwhelmingly white. Students in these four categories make up roughly 29 percent of students at the College, which SFFA argues results in fewer spots awarded to Asian-American applicants.

SFFA first filed suit against Harvard in 2014, alleging that that Asian Americans applying to Harvard face higher standards for admission than do high schoolers of other races. The College has repeatedly denied all allegations of discrimination. samuel.zwickel@thecrimson.com. delano.franklin@thecrimson

Sports

Weekly Recap

SCORES

Football vs. holy cross W, 33-31 ___________________________________________________________

men’s soccer vs. brown l, 1-0 ___________________________________________________________

woMen’s rugby Vs. notre dame college (Ohio) W, 43-12 ___________________________________________________________

women’s volleyball Vs. brown W, 3-2 ___________________________________________________________

field hockey vs. cornell w, 8-0 ___________________________________________________________

women’s volleyball Vs. yale L, 3-0 ___________________________________________________________

women’s soccer vs. brown w, 3-2 ___________________________________________________________

Football

Harvard Starts Second Half of Season Against Princeton

By JACK STOCKLESS Crimson Staff Writer

Here we are: the second half of the Ivy League football season.

Though each team has just five of its 10 games remaining, all five of these games count toward the league standings.

With non-conference play in the rearview mirror (don’t worry, I’m not going to pepper this ATI with Pearl Jam song titles), there is still plenty of time for the conference standings to shift significantly.

Currently, Princeton and Dartmouth lead the way. I’ll leave particulars for later in the article, but let’s just say they’re both extremely good and leave it at that. Penn, Yale, Harvard, and Cornell are each knotted at 1-1, and Columbia and Brown bring up the rear at 0-2. Here’s hoping for another shot at seven teams tying for the Ancient Eight championship.

YALE AT PENN Let me set the scene of a typical Friday night at Franklin Field.

Wintry wind whips through the bleachers, slicing through multiple layers of clothing and reducing beat writers’ typing speed to 10 words per minute.

An agonizing halftime show features the Harvard Band.

Stale pizza and cold chicken fingers are all that await in the media room.

These were the circumstances on Nov. 11, 2016, the last time The Crimson ventured down to Philadelphia to cover Harvard– Penn. If it seems to you that I’m acting like a wimp, you’d probably be right. I guess I need to invest in a warmer jacket.

This Friday night game will not feature weather conditions quite as dreadful — Yale (3-2, 1-1 Ivy) travels to Penn to take on the Quakers (4-1, 1-1) in mid-October, when the leaves are still clinging to the trees and winter woes have not fully taken hold.

I’ll be honest, I don’t know what to make of these Yale and Penn squads. The Quakers

boast an impressive 4-1 record, with their lone loss coming at the hands of conference-leading Dartmouth. However, the team’s non-conference slate was not particularly challenging, and it barely squeaked out a 13-10 decision over Columbia last weekend. With star receiver Justin Watson having departed for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, no Penn receiver is gaining more than 40 yards per game.

Yale was a heavy favorite to repeat as league champion entering the 2018 campaign, but so far the Bulldogs have shown signs of weakness. They lost in overtime to Holy Cross in week one, and like Penn, they also fell victim to Dartmouth in a 41-18 blowout. The Yale defense is allowing 12 more points per game than it did during its 2017 title season. Given home-field advantage, I’ll take Penn in a close one.

Penn by 1.5 PRINCETON AT HARVARD Déjà vu can be pretty eerie. It’s inexplicable, really — you recall having experienced a detailed situation in the past, but it’s also happening right in front of your eyes in the same place, with the same people, featuring the same events.

I’m getting just a bit (read: a ton) of déjà vu ahead of this Saturday’s bout between Princeton (5-0, 2-0) and host Harvard (3-2, 1-1). In this case, however, it’s not so inexplicable. In 2017, the Tigers visited Cambridge armed with a strong record and a dominant offense that was lighting up scoreboards left and right. Entering last year’s contest, the Crimson had rebounded from a heartbreaking defeat at Cornell by beating a nonleague opponent at Harvard Stadium.

There are a few small differences this time around. Instead of simply possessing a dominant offense, Princeton now has an absolutely unfair offense to go along with an equal-

ly unfair defensive unit. The Tigers are 5-0 in 2018, have scored no fewer than 45 points, and have allowed no more than 10.

Yiiiiiiiiiiiiikes.

There is perhaps nothing more gratifying in sports than being a fan of a team that defeats a bitter rival, especially when that rival has strung together a run of dominance. That is the situation as Princeton enters Harvard Stadium this Saturday.

In eight of the last 11 meetings between these two teams, the Crimson has earned the W. Though the Tigers already began to turn the tide with last season’s 52-17 beatdown, you can be sure that they will not relent. Given Princeton’s offensive and defensive production this season, I’m not sure it’s even possible for the team to relent unless it leaves both its first and second string players off the travel roster.

Princeton by 14 CORNELL AT BROWN I’m at a loss for words.

No, seriously, I don’t know what to write about this game.

There don’t appear to be any major storylines, the two teams are not exactly the cream of the FCS crop, and this game only serves to keep Cornell’s hopes alive for one more week. “Maybe, just maybe, this is the year the Big Red can contend past week six,” they’ll say up in Ithaca. You just hate to see that.

Brown (1-4, 0-2) has had a rough couple of weeks due to a challenging schedule (to say the least). Back-to-back contests on the road against Rhode Island and Princeton resulted in a final cumulative scoring tally of 96-10. However, Cornell (2-3, 1-1) does have to travel a significant distance for this matchup and is coming off a 31-0 drubbing courtesy of Colgate.

If I’m being honest, here’s what I do know. One: I’d be losing gobs of money if I actually bet my picks on these games.

Two: every time I pick against the Big Red, Cornell obliges by

BREAKING DOWN Senior quarterback Tom Stewart braces for a hit. TIMOTHY R. O’MEARA—Crimson photographer

winning. Three: every time I pick the Big Red to come out on top, the team rolls over. Every.

Single. Time. In other words, the following pick is bad news for the Ithacans for reasons one and three.

Cornell by 6.5 DARTMOUTH AT COLUMBIA Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease is currently terrorizing Dartmouth’s campus.

The ailment, commonly seen in children, has afflicted over 50 students, according to an Oct. 11 report in The Dartmouth.

Hand, Foot, and Mouth even

made an appearance in Major League Baseball this season — New York Mets pitcher Noah Syndergaard missed some time when he contracted it.

You’ve got to hand it to the Big Green — its team (5-0, 2-0) has been nothing short of dominant this fall. The team has pitched two shutouts so far, and it is just as adept on the other side of the ball, posting 39 points per game. I don’t want to end up with my foot in my mouth, but I don’t think this game will be particularly close.

One of Columbia’s redeeming qualities — a quality that will perhaps allow the team to

avoid a beatdown until the second quarter instead of within the first 10 minutes — is its defense. The Lions (3-2, 0-2) held Lovett’s Tigers to their lowest point total of the season so far (still a ridiculous 45 points).

The Columbia defense is allowing an average of 24.2 points per game, though Princeton’s output skews this result.

As Dartmouth travels to Robert K. Kraft Field, situated beautifully at the mouth of the Hudson River, it aims to improve to 6-0 ahead of next week’s tilt against Harvard. Not jack.stockless@thecrimson.com.

tennis

Coach Andrew Rueb ’95 Leads and Learns With Crimson

By COULSON RICH CONTRIBUTING Writer

When Dave Fish announced his retirement after 42 years, Harvard lost a coaching legend who immensely shaped the men’s

tennis program. However, there was one person who was the obvious choice to be Fish’s successor, and that was Andrew Rueb ‘95.

For the past 11 years, he has helped Harvard to 192 victories

and four Ivy League Championships as an assistant and associate head coach. Now he looks to continue the program’s tradition of excellence created by his mentor.

As only the fourth head

STRETCHING OUT The team stretches to its limit for Coach Rueb ‘95. timothy r. o’meara—Crimson photographer

coach in the history of the men’s tennis program, Rueb brings a unique set of skills and knowledge that comes from the vast amount of time he has spent around Harvard. He has been an undergraduate student, a graduate student at Harvard Divinity School, and has even served as a proctor, academic advisor, and teaching fellow over the years. Rueb was named the John Reardon Male Scholar Athlete of 1995.

“I definitely think its an advantage to understand how to walk this tightrope of high-performance athletics and worldclass education,” Reub said.

“When I speak to parents and players about managing the on and off court demands of Harvard, there’s extra weight behind those words because I’ve had to live it.”

During his years as assistant coach, Rueb became an ardent proponent of integration between the academic and athletic sides of Harvard.

“I think it really does help to be well connected with the academic life on campus,” Reub said. “Knowing that there [are] obviously certain pressure points in the academic calendar in anybody’s year, and so I think that give and take really helps with how [the student athletes] can do the best that they can in the classroom but also excel on the court.”

His commitment to the classroom is probably best shown by the Back to School Week program that has become an annual event since its conception eight years ago. After noting that both coaches and professors were not very familiar with what happens on the other side of the Charles, coach Rueb saw a

“perfect opportunity” to bridge the gap between these two sides of Harvard. The program encourages coaches to sit in on class with their athletes and see what it’s like to learn from the all-star faculty that Harvard has.

“I think I was uniquely situated to help build some of that bridge but I also thought the other coaches were more than enthusiastic about learning a little more about what happens on the other side of the river, to get to know more professors, and to make those connections,” Rueb said. “It’s really been something taken on with both hands and it’s been great to watch it grow throughout the years.”

Rueb’s emphasis on learning also extends to himself, which he says is one of the many lessons he learned from his predecessor, Dave Fish. He cites humility and innovation as two of Fish’s values that he wants his own to players to learn.

“I think that again and again with the mentors and teachers I most respect, they tend to be the best students as well as good teachers,” Rueb said.

Coach Rueb’s experiences as a collegiate player and on the professional tour give him the knowledge and credibility necessary to coach a college tennis team. During his time at Harvard, he was named Ivy League Player of the Year twice and was inducted into the Harvard Varsity Club Hall of Fame in 2013.

He refers to his time on the pro circuit as one of the best learning experiences he has ever had. He considers the highlight of his tennis career to be the chance to play doubles at Wimbledon in 1997.

“I always considered my four years on the tour my second degree after Harvard,” Rueb said.

His expertise in this area is not lost on his players, including sophomore Lane Leschly, who said that “for anything doubles related, he’s the best guy in the business.”

As for the future of the men’s tennis program at Harvard, Rueb feels that in addition to NCAA appearances and Ivy League titles, creating a strong team culture is one of his major goals.

“I want to see if we can continue to keep this as a program of significance, and what I mean by that is developing our young men’s character in a way that the university and our alumni can be proud of,” Rueb said.

Captain Chris Morrow felt that Rueb’s history with the program helps with the continuation of the program’s culture.

“It’s been a seamless transition, he knows Harvard inside and out. He was very well set up to step up into that role. [He’s] really big on character development,” Morrow said, “I think that’s something that stands out about him.”

Leschly also commented on the team’s atmosphere.

“He does an incredible job creating a really supportive and cohesive culture on the team that Fish had,” Leschly said. “So he’s continued that really well.”

With the 2018 season underway, Harvard Tennis has had good showings in Ivy competition and intercollegiate tournaments. But perhaps more importantly, the program is continuing to develop a culture of excellence under the leadership of its new Scott Mead ‘77 Head Tennis Coach, Andrew Rueb.