Leading Today's Colleges and Universities: Challenges and Opportunities

As a 1973 ACE Fellow, I am honored to help the American Council on Education mark the 40th anniversary of the Fellows Program during this meeting, which includes a focus on the importance of effective leadership for the future of American higher education. Because I have taught at six universities (three public and three private) and have served in six administrative capacities, I have been asked to give my perspectives on leadership challenges in different institutional settings. It seemed to me that the best way to do this would be by discussing challenges and opportunities for higher education in the 21st century, before addressing the specific responsibilities of higher education leaders.

In 1835, Alexis de Tocqueville, in his classic work Democracy in America, coined the term individualism to describe the American character. According to him, the development and appreciation of individualism in the United States, the nation that had become the exemplar of democracy, was key to its citizens' ability to reconcile common good with private good, and common interest with private interest. Individualism allowed citizens to both cope with their short-term needs and plan for their long-term concerns, and it enabled them to be part of a dynamic new social compact in which mutual assistance went along with self-help and volunteerism.

Today, the American university is unquestionably the most democratic in the world. It is "popular" in the best sense of the word, admitting and educating unprecedented numbers of men and women of every race and social class. Students from every imaginable background-and here I speak from personal experience-have found a place in this nation's incredible variety of colleges and universities. Today, there are nearly 3,400 U.S. colleges and universities, including some 1,200 public and private two-year institutions. American colleges and universities enroll approximately 15 million students and grant around 2 million degrees each year. A $200 billion enterprise, higher education employs approximately 3 million people. Indeed, more Americans work in higher education than in the automobile, steel, and textile industries combined.

Today's Challenges

The diversity of our higher education system gives it great strength. Individual institutions have traditionally emphasized different local, regional, national, and international needs by providing educational opportunities to diverse populations, expanding scientific and technical knowledge, providing opportunities for continuing education, and other means. However, one of the greatest challenges facing higher education today is how to protect this diversity. Unfortunately, it seems that instead of emphasizing variety, competition-which affects all aspects of higher education, from recruiting students to developing curricula-tends to lead to uniformity.

Protecting the diversity of our colleges and universities and facing the many other complex and critical higher education issues do not have uniform solutions, nor, certainly, easy ones. They require thoughtful analysis, cogent deliberation, intellectual courage, and a constant consultation of our national conscience, in terms of our responsibility to and expectations of American higher education.

What are some of the issues that need to be addressed?

1. Maintaining Academic Freedom While Conducting Research

For a long time, the main challenge facing research universities was to maintain their independence from federal regulators. But in the 21st century, the university faces a different, and perhaps even more difficult challenge: How can it maintain its leadership in pure research-and its independence from business and industry-if distracted by the demands of the marketplace for research developments that can be used for financial gain?

The increasing commercialization of university research has the potential to be a corrupting influence if economic necessities force faculty to surrender some of their independence and other prerogatives. It may affect the faculty's research agenda, or discourage pure research in favor of research with commercial applications. How to balance theoretical and practical research and to protect the individual rights of the faculty, as well as the collective rights of the university and the integrity of research, are fundamental questions that higher education institutions will have to confront with increasing urgency in the years to come.

In my opinion, academic freedom, which is also a prerequisite for teaching, learning, and leadership development, is necessary to protect the integrity of research at American universities. Academic freedom has thrived in America, but freedom is always fragile. During the nation's wars, in the Cold War years, and now, in the post-9/11 era, academic freedom has faced-and will continue to face-many assaults, usually under the various banners of nationalism, patriotism, ethnicity, and religion, as well as the ideologies of the right and the left. Thankfully, these assaults generally have been thwarted, and setbacks have been temporary.

How to protect academic freedom from the proponents of "political correctness"-the many varieties of liberals and conservatives alike-from ideologues, politicians, even alumni and alumnae, is a great challenge. But it is one that we must meet, because helping everyone learn to think without prejudice and to teach without fear is central to the mission of our universities.

2. Providing Intellectual Coherence in the Information Revolution

The information revolution is another challenge confronting U.S. universities today, and it parallels the Industrial Revolution in its impact and far-reaching consequences. It is extending the territory available for our minds' explorations and taking our imaginations into the deep unknown along the new pathways being pioneered by access to the Internet and the use of computers.

The information revolution puts a great burden on the educational establishment to provide some kind of intellectual coherence, some kind of connection with our past, our present, and our future. In the 21st century, universities are themselves prodigious information machines. But the everincreasing, borderless amount of information rushing at us all the time has led to a new peril: This has become an age of extraordinary specialization and fragmentation of knowledge.

Under the circumstances, we need to rethink the way we pursue learning and education, and this means we need to reorganize the curriculum periodically and reframe its context to give coherence to our specialized and fragmented knowledge base. More than ever, liberal arts is losing prominence and receding from its position as one of the remaining tools of general education that includes a rigorous science component. Clearly, it is time to promote interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary education, in order to integrate science, the humanities, the social sciences, and the arts.

3. Facing the Economic Challenges that Come with Greater Access

Among the issues facing American universities is the fact that the United States has democratized access to higher education and attempted to nationalize opportunity on a scale unprecedented in world history. That is unquestionably to our national credit. The GI Bill and Pell Grants, among other innovations, have opened up the possibility of a college-level education to American students in ways that previous generations would have never even dared to dream. Remember that higher education enrollment grew from just 4 percent of the collegeage population in 1900 to more than 65 percent by the end of the century. But with greater access come greater challenges, not least among them the reality that federal, state, and municipal governments all face financial crises. Especially for those universities without substantial endowments, looming financial problems devolve not only upon the institutions themselves, but also on their leaders, their faculty, and, of course, their students.

Technology, the communications industry, the growing number of for-profit institutions, professional schools, and distance learning together present yet another major economic challenge to higher education in that they are all potential rivals. And in many cases, they are increasingly successful in their attempt to meet the specific needs of business, government, professional groups, and others, often through innovative efforts such as universities without walls.

4. Keeping Pace with International Competition

Let's not forget the fact that competition for students also is coming from other countries, which have begun to understand that higher education can be big business on a global scale. The European Union, for example, in a deliberate move to compete with American universities and thus attract international students, has streamlined the continent's higher education system in order to offer American-style degree programs in such areas as business administration and continuing professional education.

This is a startling new development, because until now, two-thirds of the world's students studying abroad chose the United States for their education. They not only provided us with a diversity of talent, a welcome influx of ideas and perspectives, and an opportunity for American students to experience other cultures firsthand, but they also contributed more than $13 billion annually to the American economy. However, in 2004, according to a report by the Institute of International Education, the overall number of foreign students enrolled at U.S. colleges and universities declined for the first time in 30 years. Enrollments from countries that typically have sent the largest number of students to the United States fell, such as China, Japan, and Canada. Several Middle Eastern countries, such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, sent about 15 percent fewer students to the United States, decreasing the enrollment figures from that region for the second straight year. The cause of this decline is not just that universities in Europe and elsewhere are attracting today's globally oriented students. The problem is perhaps even more directly attributable to post-9/11 security measures and the delay-even denial-of visas to students wishing to study in the United States.

5. Taking More Responsibility for K-12 Education

Looking in yet another direction, higher education also cannot be oblivious to the fate of K-12 education in America. In particular, universities must take greater responsibility for the training and education they provide to teachers. Higher education institutions cannot continue to subject their schools of education to benign neglect. They have a moral responsibility to help fix our public school system by making the education and training of teachers a central priority. It is, in fact, in higher education's self-interest to follow such a course of action, because universities simply cannot afford to dedicate the first two years of student study to remedial studies, which is what's happening today, when ill-prepared students, who have been taught by ill-trained and poorly educated teachers, arrive at the university's doorstep. Universities have an obligation to the nation and to themselves not to institutionalize mediocrity by tolerating substandard schools of education on their campuses.

Tally up all these challenges and concerns, and it's not hard to understand why there are anxious voices raised in academia about the potential demise of the university as we know it. I believe that the quality and excellence of postsecondary education, and of our faculty in particular, are the best weapons in the arsenal of American universities. That doesn't mean there isn't room for change, for new ideas and new directions, or for developing new mechanisms for teaching and learning. I deeply believe that flexibility, integrity, and excellence-especially in regard to education-are not mutually exclusive.

What Can Higher Education Leaders Do?

A great gap exists between the public's expectation of you as leaders and the reality of what your experiences will be and what you can accomplish. In my recent foreword to David Gardner's memoir, Earning My Degree, I highlighted some of these unrealistic public expectations regarding university presidents. This is how Henry Wriston, who served as president of Brown University from 1937 to 1955, portrayed the president's job:

"The president is expected to be an educator; to have been at some time a scholar; to have judgment about finance; to know something about construction, maintenance, and labor policy; to speak virtually continuously in words that charm and never offend; to take bold positions with which no one will disagree; to consult everyone and follow all proffered advice; and to do everything through committees, but with great speed and without error."

The late Clark Kerr, president of the University of California, gave a similar description:

"The American university president is expected to be a friend of the students; a colleague of the faculty; a good fellow with the alumni; a sound administrator with the trustees; a good speaker with the public; an astute bargainer with the foundations and the federal agencies; a politician with the state legislature; a friend of industry, labor, and agriculture; a persuasive diplomat with donors; a champion of education, generally; . . . a spokesman to the press; a scholar in his own right; a public servant at the state and national levels; a devotee of opera and football equally; a decent human being, a good husband and father. . . . He should be firm, yet gentle, sensitive to others, insensitive to himself; look to the past and the future, yet be firmly planted in the present; he should be both visionary and sound, affable, yet reflective . . . a good American but ready to criticize the status quo fearlessly; a seeker of truth, where the truth may not hurt too much; a source of public policy pronouncements when they do not reflect on his own institution."

In order to be an effective leader, you can't just be a manager; you have to actually lead. To be a successful leader, you need to know the history and evolution of your institution, the history of educational thought, the current policies of the state and federal governments-and equally important, you have to know your institution's schools and departments, their academic strengths and weaknesses, and their aspirations. You have to know the work of your predecessors. You must take a discreet (or not so discreet) inventory of the university's assets, as well as its financial and human resources, and analyze the institution's alumni finances, fund-raising efforts, and quality of students. Insist on receiving and reading the past accreditation reports-some of them provide very helpful insights. Get to know your faculty; be a part of them. Affirm your values and aspirations through a carefully chosen handful of issues and actions. Don't ignore the staff, and don't be afraid of students.

One of the most difficult issues you'll have to deal with is how to manage the aspirations of students and faculty. What if some of the problems are endemic, or you don't have the resources to solve them? Be clear and up front: Don't give vague promises that you are "working on" the problems. Introducing a note of reality is necessary to win faculty members' and students' confidence; to have a specific plan to mobilize them is the next step.

How to deal with trustees is another challenge. Legally, they are in charge of the university and its governance. Keep them informed; don't finesse them, don't surprise them, and don't try to educate them in public-try to explain complex issues to them in confidence. Involve them on a policy level, not in administrative minutiae. Don't create a leadership vacuum, because trustees will fill it-instead of remaining a policy-making body, they'll begin to micromanage.

At a university, you will face two cultures: academic (faculty, students, staff) and corporate (trustees and alumni). Don't pit them against each other-try to mediate between the two. If you attempt to line them up against each other, you will succeed only in the short run; in the end, you'll lose.

Some other observations:

* Don't treat your unions as outsiders to the interests of the university; they are an integral part of the university community. By treating them as such, you will bring them under the moral authority of the entire campus, not just the administration.

* Don't boast or gloat that you won against a union and thus imply that a given union or its leadership is weak. If you do, the union and its members will try to rectify their mistakes, overcome their shortcomings, and rally against you.

* Be consistent. Credibility and trust are crucial for your success. Mean what you say and do what you say you are going to do. When firing individuals, don't humiliate them; allow them to save face and dignity. Cruel, crude behavior is not a sign of strength, nor is magnanimity a sign of weakness. Remember also that the student newspaper is not the right venue to communicate with the campus. On crucial issues, write a thoughtful letter to the entire university community-the staff, the public, the trustees, and alumni-so that everyone will know about the complexities of the issue.

* If you are fund raising, don't concentrate your entire attention on the new donors-you need to take care of the past donors as well. You cannot act as a nouveau riche or an opportunist.

* If you have accomplished what you came to do at the institution and have decided to move on, keep your board apprised of your intentions. Don't surprise them-but be firm in your decision. As a dear colleague of mine recently said to me, quoting a wise man's saying, "When you reach the station, get off."

Note:

1. Gardner, D. P. (2005). Earning my degree. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

VARTAN GREGORIAN is president of Carnegie Corporation of New York. This article is adapted from his remarks delivered at ACE's 87th Annual Meeting, held in February 2005.

Copyright American Council on Education Spring 2005
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved