A recent article about Harvard in The New York Times caught my eye. It began with the following statement from an undergraduate:

"You'd be stupid if you came to Harvard for the teaching. You go to a liberal arts college for the teaching. You come to Harvard to be around some of the greatest minds on earth."

Comments from two Harvard professors further elaborated on the concern:

"We need to put our money where our mouth is. We can't just mention excellent teachers occasionally. We have to notice and reward their efforts consistently."

"People at Harvard are concerned when they hear that some of our undergraduates can go through four years here and not get to know a faculty member well enough to get a letter of recommendation."

To Harvard's credit it seems to be tackling a problem which has long concerned many of the nation's top research universities, both public and private. While both research and high quality teaching are desired, cutting edge research and the rewards noted for it in The New York Times article-"tenure, money, prestige, prizes, fame" - often seem to become so important that teaching is given a secondary role.

Harvard formed a small task force of some of its most renowned professors, professors who are acclaimed for the brilliance of their teaching as well as their stature in their fields.

While other universities suffer from the same problem which affects Harvard to a greater or lesser degree, one would hope that all of them would reflect seriously on this issue, honestly determine where they stand and then - like Harvard - develop and implement an action plan. Sharing these plans publicly will also allow both current and prospective students and their families to be more informed about the nature of the actual educational experience at each university as opposed to the version provided by tour guides and in brochures.