Harvard University Cuts Ph.D. Admissions

Harvard University has announced significant reductions in Ph.D. student admissions. According to reports, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences has cut slots for the Science division by over 75 percent and for the Arts & Humanities division by about 60 percent for the upcoming two years.

Some departments are facing drastic measures. For example:

• The German department is set to lose all its Ph.D. student positions.
• The History department will allow only 10 new students, down from 13 the previous year.
• The Sociology department plans to admit six students for the 2026-27 academic year, and none the following year.
• The Organismic and Evolutionary Biology department will decrease by 75%.
• Social Science departments will see reductions of 50-75% in the next two years.

Dean Hopi E. Hoekstra conveyed these changes in an email, communicating “significantly reduced levels” of student admissions earlier in October.

She reportedly cited pressures from federal funding and an increased tax on the university’s endowment as key reasons for these cuts. Though she didn’t name President Trump, the wider conflict with his administration obviously weighs on the minds of the university’s community.

On a related note, a federal judge recently ordered the Trump administration to restore over $2.6 billion in research funding to Harvard. The university indicated that most of this funding had indeed been reinstated, although exact figures weren’t disclosed.

Moreover, Harvard reported an operating loss of $133 million for the 2024-2025 fiscal year, marking its first budget deficit since 2020. The report attributed this decline to “political and economic disruption,” further pointing to how the Trump administration’s actions led to the abrupt end of significant federal research grants.

However, one could argue against feeling too sorry for Harvard. After all, it’s the wealthiest university globally, with an endowment of around $56.9 billion for the fiscal year 2025. Interestingly, this year saw watershed donations, with contributions totaling nearly $629 million, a rise from $528 million the previous year.

Are the cuts to a handful of Ph.D. positions truly the core issue behind the financial strain?

It might be more effective for Harvard to reconsider the large number of administrators it employs. The university reported around 8,431 full-time administrative positions compared to about 2,249 full-time faculty and 6,973 undergraduates.

Harvard’s approach to these cuts seems to indicate a desire for public attention. There are two main theories as to why this is happening.

The first explanation, and one I lean towards, is that Harvard is entangled in a PR battle with the Trump administration. By making these noticeable cuts, they could be trying to provoke public sentiment.

On social media, one user referred to it as a kind of hostage situation.

Some might think that turning Harvard into a trade school would be a fitting humiliation for the institution, but there are others, including myself, who want to see growth and reform rather than dismantling entire fields of study.

The second plausible reason for their cuts could be an attempt to appease the Trump administration. Recently, Trump announced a tentative arrangement with Harvard to restore previously frozen federal grants, contingent upon the university investing $500 million to create trade schools.

Trump suggested this would lead to the establishment of a series of trade schools run by Harvard. He mentioned that it’s a significant investment and might ultimately put them in good standing again.

This could be a form of appeasement—a $500 million investment isn’t negligible. Yet, it also seems Harvard has enough room to trim its administrative costs.

Trump’s demand certainly seems like a challenge to the university’s leadership, who traditionally may not value trade schools. In response, Harvard might be acting out by seeking to sway public opinion against the administration.