With Claudine Gay’s dishonorable discharge from the Harvard presidency, the conservative chorus will be predictable: Her failure should be a referendum on diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Not so fast.
Let’s be clear: Valuing diversity is not some grand social experiment. If we want to create a society that is fair and inclusive for all, we need equity as a guiding principle. Critics will say this practice amounts to lowering standards, but that’s a red herring. People of color and women are qualified, but they are often overlooked because of systemic discrimination.
In the case of Gay, it will be debated for a long time whether Harvard’s first Black president was qualified for the job. On Tuesday, she announced she had resigned after only six months, the shortest tenure in the university’s nearly 400-year history.
Advertisement
On paper, Gay seemed right for the job. She earned her doctorate from Harvard with distinction, became a professor of government, and rose to a top administrative post as dean of the faculty of arts and sciences.
As president, Gay’s leadership was quickly tested, first by the political furor caused by Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack on Israel and then her testimony before a congressional committee. By many accounts, she failed both.
Still, the Corporation, Harvard’s chief governing body, issued a lengthy statement of support for Gay on Dec. 12, calling her “the right leader to help our community heal and to address the very serious societal issues we are facing.”
The Corporation even stuck with Gay after having to acknowledge in the same statement that she posted corrections on two of her papers to quell plagiarism allegations.
So what changed?
I give a lot of credit to the Corporation for giving Gay a second chance, but she was on thin ice. What changed was another review Harvard disclosed on Dec. 20 that found additional instances of inadequate citation in Gay’s writings — just as a congressional committee launched an inquiry into how Harvard handled allegations of plagiarism against Gay.
Gay could have recovered from her management missteps, but not from the lingering concerns about her academic integrity as the leader of the world’s most renowned university. The Harvard president must be held to the highest academic standards, and the Corporation must have realized that as pressure grew for Gay to resign.
Advertisement
Gay must have realized that, too. The path ahead was already difficult. Having to constantly defend her academic bona fides made her position untenable. Gay decided last week to resign and return to the faculty, according to my Globe colleagues Mike Damiano and Hilary Burns.
A graceful exit was the best solution, and that’s what we saw play out Tuesday with statements from Gay and the Corporation.
“Sad as I am to be sending this message, my hopes for Harvard remain undimmed,” Gay wrote in a message to members of the Harvard community. “When my brief presidency is remembered, I hope it will be seen as a moment of reawakening to the importance of striving to find our common humanity —and of not allowing rancor and vituperation to undermine the vital process of education.”
Members of the Corporation, led by Penny Pritzker, a scion of the Hyatt Hotels fortune, wrote that Gay “has devoted her career to an institution whose ideals and priorities she has worked tirelessly to advance, and we are grateful for the extraordinary contributions she has made — and will continue to make — as a leader, a teacher, a scholar, a mentor, and an inspiration to many.”
The Corporation could have ended its statement there, but it once again addressed an elephant in the room. This time it was about the unwarranted rebukes aimed at Gay as the first person of color to serve as president.
Advertisement
“While President Gay has acknowledged missteps and has taken responsibility for them, it is also true that she has shown remarkable resilience in the face of deeply personal and sustained attacks,” wrote the Corporation. “While some of this has played out in the public domain, much of it has taken the form of repugnant and in some cases racist vitriol directed at her through disgraceful emails and phone calls. We condemn such attacks in the strongest possible terms.”
Gay may have been Harvard’s first Black president, but she should not be its last. The Gay presidency should not be seen as a referendum on diversity, equity, and inclusion but rather a referendum on Harvard’s insular processes that led to a failed presidency.
The Corporation needs to do a lot of soul-searching as it seeks a new president. There needs to be a more thorough vetting process and one that takes concerns about plagiarism, no matter how minor, more seriously.
Pritzker chaired the last search committee, which, according to the Harvard Crimson, was made up of 15 members of the university’s two governing boards. This time there should be an independent search committee so that board members — who must approve the selection — don’t have to play both judge and jury.
It’s hard to be a college president these days, but being president of Harvard is still an opportunity of a lifetime. It’s also an opportunity to renew the university’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Shirley Leung is a Business columnist and host of the Globe Opinion podcast “Say More with Shirley Leung.” Find the podcast on Apple, Spotify, and globe.com/saymore. Follow her on Threads @shirley02186
Advertisement
Shirley Leung is a Business columnist. She can be reached at shirley.leung@globe.com.