Excellence Without a Soul
| Company type | Book |
|---|---|
| Industry | Education, Academia, Publishing |
| Founded | 2006 |
| Founder | Harry R. Lewis |
| Products | Non-fiction book on higher education |
Excellence Without A Soul: How a Great University Forgot Education (later reissued as Excellence Without a Soul: Does Liberal Education Have a Future?) is a 2006 publication authored by Harry R. Lewis, a computer science professor and former dean of Harvard College. The book offers a critical analysis of Harvard University and, by implication, the broader landscape of American higher education.[1] Drawing upon his tenure as dean from 1995 to 2003, Lewis addresses significant challenges including grade inflation, issues in college athletics, the absence of a substantive core curriculum, increasing commercialization, helicopter parenting, and concerns related to sexual harassment.[2]
Lewis points out the ongoing trend of grade inflation, highlighting that the majority of Harvard students graduate with Honors distinctions, particularly within the humanities disciplines.[3] Faculty members encounter pressure from both students and administrative bodies—often influencing decisions regarding tenure—to adopt more lenient grading practices.[4] Grading criteria lack consistency and standardization across departments.[5] Notably, some parents have begun to directly engage with professors over their children's grades, a development Lewis critiques for undermining student autonomy.[6] He argues that Harvard’s administration, including former President Lawrence Summers, has largely accommodated these entitled behaviors instead of confronting them.[7]
Although he concedes that enhanced student preparedness may partly explain rising grades,[8] Lewis contends that an overemphasis on GPA encourages students to select courses strategically rather than pursue genuine intellectual growth.[9] He advocates for more stimulating course designs to better inspire learners.[10] Nevertheless, he considers grade inflation a less pressing issue compared to other institutional shortcomings.[11]
Lewis maintains that contemporary Harvard has relinquished its responsibility to cultivate students' ethical development,[12] favoring a "cafeteria model" where faculty teach and students engage only with subjects they personally choose.[13] This method diminishes the core principles of a liberal education, restricting exposure to diverse perspectives and comprehensive personal growth.[14] The focus on academic achievement fosters competition and isolation rather than fostering community involvement.[15] Lewis expresses concern over Harvard’s neglect of civic virtues integral to American democracy, noting that Enlightenment principles foundational to such values are rarely emphasized in the curriculum.[16]
He critiques Summers for expanding administrative bureaucracy at the expense of improving faculty-student interaction,[17] resulting in student-faculty engagement levels below national averages. Faculty assessments prioritize research accomplishments over teaching effectiveness.[18] As a result, many professors demonstrate limited commitment to nurturing students, treating them more as consumers than learners.[19] This consumer-oriented approach fuels Harvard’s preoccupation with prestige and rivalry rather than educational quality, making it vulnerable to transient trends.[20]
Both students and parents frequently perceive higher education narrowly as a means to achieve high-paying jobs rather than as an opportunity for moral or social development.[21][22] Lewis notes that numerous alumni pursue careers in consulting and investment banking instead of contributing more broadly to society.[23] Dormitories originally intended to foster democratic community living now emphasize comfort over communal engagement.[24] While holding Summers responsible for promoting commercialization and public relations priorities, Lewis acknowledges wider systemic forces shaping university leadership decisions.[25]
Lewis also critiques Harvard’s approach to handling alleged rape cases for depicting women as completely powerless,[26][27] and he praises college athletes’ commitment while condemning their win-at-all-costs mentality despite their amateur status.[28]
Some critics challenge Lewis’s use of the term "soul," viewing it as outdated or carrying religious connotations,[29][30][31] whereas others propose that faith-based education might provide solutions to current shortcomings.[32][33][34][35][36][37]
The work has been made available in Chinese and Korean translations.
References
External links
- Video Discussion featured on C-SPAN
- Transcript from a conversation covered in The Washington Post