On Monday, Corporation Senior Fellow Penny Pritzker announced that Alan Garber will continue serving as Harvard’s president beyond June 30, 2027, rather than stepping down at the end of his previously stated three-year term.
This is good news. Garber has led the University in a directionally correct way, but it’s far from ‘mission accomplished.’ His decision to stay on gives him more time and authority to turn early reforms into lasting change and to move Harvard’s relationship with the federal government into a new era.
That said, an extended presidency is only as valuable as what it delivers. Here’s what 1636 Forum will be watching for next.
What We’ll Be Watching For
A sustained focus on Veritas and academic excellence. Garber has rightly emphasized Harvard’s core mission: truth-seeking and academic excellence. Refocusing a university of this size takes years, not months, and it requires a willingness to draw firm boundaries, reduce scope creep, and be principled and disciplined in Harvard’s partnerships, including with the federal government.
Transparency, especially when decisions are controversial. Many recent changes have been for the better, but Harvard has too often failed to explain the reasoning behind them. Just last week, Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) dean Andrea Baccarelli made a tough call to refocus its François-Xavier Bagnoud (FXB) Center, but didn’t fully explain why, prompting suspicion and backlash. The most credible transparency is the kind that risks criticism. Garber has an opportunity to model that standard and embed it across University management.
Measurable progress and accountability. Less vague, checklist-type “we’ve done a lot” talk, more concrete outcomes — on academics, campus climate, and institutional performance. Actions matter, but results matter more. That includes finances: Harvard’s structural deficits predate recent political turmoil, and closing them will require discipline, data-driven choices, and alignment between spending and the University’s academic mission.
No-excuses leadership. Harvard doesn’t get a pass on any issue just because peer institutions share the same problems. If grade inflation or declining academic rigor is widespread in higher education, that’s an argument for action at Harvard, not an excuse for inaction.
Garber’s decision to stay on also sends a clear signal — to the federal government and to skeptics within the University — that he is not a lame duck. That removes a barrier to his reforms actually taking hold, including initiatives like his vague April 2025 commitment to create a “major initiative to promote viewpoint diversity.”
This would be an ideal moment for Garber to publicly articulate his priorities for the presidency, and the tradeoffs they’ll require. Harvard is famously decentralized, and the president can’t know, let alone control, everything. That’s why clearly stated priorities are the most effective way to align such a large institution.
A Deeper Governance Question
This announcement also raises a harder question about governance.
Extending Garber’s term postpones any real test of whether the Harvard Corporation has meaningfully reformed how it selects presidents. After the failures of the process that produced Claudine Gay’s presidency, that reform remains unfinished. Garber’s steady leadership does not absolve the Corporation of responsibility for becoming more transparent, accountable, and well-governed itself.
A Brief Look at Garber’s Record So Far
Since taking office in January 2024 (first as interim president, then permanent), Garber has led Harvard through one of the most difficult periods in the University’s recent history with a notably steady, understated style. It is also one marked by meaningful moves toward academic excellence, viewpoint diversity, stronger governance, and disciplined leadership.
A few moves in the right direction under President Garber’s leadership:
→ Harvard is refocusing around its core mission of academic excellence.
The University reinstated its SAT/ACT requirement for College admissions to better identify academic potential. Harvard researchers found that “considering standardized test scores is likely to make the admissions process at Harvard more meritocratic while increasing socioeconomic diversity.”
Harvard is confronting the College’s academic disengagement, class absenteeism, and grade inflation problem head-on, and even being honest about it with The New York Times.
It also appointed David Deming as Dean of Harvard College, whose goals include recentering academics, tackling grade inflation, and helping the College adapt to AI.
→ Harvard is making a concerted effort to strengthen academic freedom, viewpoint diversity, and constructive dialogue on campus.
Harvard instituted an institutional neutrality policy, which discourages official statements on public controversies unrelated to the University’s mission.
Harvard eliminated DEI hiring statements from the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, which Law School professor Randall Kennedy had called “ideological litmus tests” and “inimical to an intellectually healthy university environment.”
Harvard appointed Jeremy Weinstein as Dean of the Kennedy School, who was praised by the University’s official report on Anti-Muslim, Anti-Arab, and Anti-Palestinian Bias for “fostering respectful dialogue and engagement with diverse perspectives.”
Harvard added a required College admissions essay asking applicants: “describe a time when you strongly disagreed with someone about an idea or issue. How did you communicate or engage with this person? What did you learn from this experience?”
Harvard strengthened new student orientation programming across schools to set expectations for dialogue across differences. New required modules emphasize community values, constructive disagreement, and the skills needed to engage with diverse perspectives.
→ Harvard updated and began enforcing time, place, and manner rules so shared campus spaces support the University’s academic mission.
Harvard announced new University-wide “Campus Use Rules” in 2024, standardizing policies across schools for protests and shared spaces, and clarifying financial and disciplinary consequences for organizations that violate the rules.
Harvard has since begun enforcing its new Campus Use Rules, including suspensions and event cancellations for policy violations. These actions reflect a shift from past years, though the University has not recently faced or tested a major cross-school disciplinary case.
→ Garber showed resilient leadership during a turbulent year.
Harvard has navigated intense government pressure, funding, and student visa threats with conviction and creativity. Garber’s leadership earned him a 74% approval rating from Faculty of Arts and Sciences professors this spring, the highest for any recent Harvard president.
Harvard is great at forming committees and very good at letting time pass. Garber staying on matters because it reduces one of the easiest excuses for delay: “we’re in a transition.” Now the question is simple: what gets done, and on what timeline?
Pritzker praised Garber today as a “vital source of calm in turbulent times.” He has been, and Harvard is fortunate for it. But Garber’s presidency should ultimately be judged not by how calm things feel but by what actually changes.
Based on what he’s accomplished in under two years, Garber has earned real confidence. If anyone can turn this moment into lasting change, it’s him.