Men, Women & Children of Dartmouth: READ THIS

Colleges and Universities A-Z Dartmouth College
1

<p>Featured</a> Article - WSJ.com</p>

<p>This has apparently been posted before, but it received only moderate exposure- and after weeks of consideration, I think every man, woman and child who has a connection to Dartmouth absolutely NEEDS to take the time to read this. </p>

<p>The 'magical' community at Dartmouth seems to be headed way off of course if this article can be taken at face value, which seems to be the case. It paints a VERY unflattering picture of "beloved" President Wright and the puppeteers on the board. For this very reason, T.J. Rodgers is EXACTLY the type of person I would want not only ON the board, but RUNNING it. He is a passionate grad who has studied at another great school and gone on to achieve enormous real-world success. And isn't that the POINT of a great education? To enable us with the skill sets and opportunities to impact real, positive change in the world? To quote the New York Times: "(Dr. Jim Yong Kim) is an unusual choice for a university president. He is known less for his academic achievements than for his groundbreaking work..." </p>

<p>Rodgers VOLUNTARILY, and for no personal gain whatsoever, offered up his time, perspective, and unique leadership skills as tools for improving and sustaining that which Dartmouth has become, and in return is met with nothing but hostility from the senior members of Dartmouth's leadership community. </p>

<p>I want EVERYBODY to chime in.</p>

2

<p>Almost 3 year old story. I for one am more than sick of discussing and chiming. As my grandmother would say- “Don’t borrow trouble”</p>

3

<p>BaitandSwitch - </p>

<p>Rogers is still on the Board, two years after this 2007 article you post. Every person who serves as a trustee does so voluntarily, makes sacrifices of energy and time and passion for the same purpose, and every member brings to the table an impressive skill set.</p>

<p>Can’t tell from your comments above whether you think Dr. Kim a good choice or not, but per this article:<br>
[Dartmouth</a> Names Harvard Health Expert as President (Update2) - Bloomberg.com](<a href=“Politics - Bloomberg”>Politics - Bloomberg)
Rogers has praise:</p>

<p>“Trustee Thurman J. Rodgers, who supported an unsuccessful lawsuit that would have maintained the power of alumni trustees on the board, praised Kim as an inspiring intellectual leader who cares about teaching undergraduates.” </p>

<p>as does the Trustee who perhaps most reasonably represented the cause against the lawsuit :</p>

<p>"Kim is “an inspired choice, a living example of how you can take advantage of higher education to do good,” said John H. Mathias Jr., president of the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College, which represents the school’s more than 65,000 graduates. “If you read his resume, you’d think this was a lifetime of work. He’s not yet 50.” </p>

<p>I truly believe both Trustees Rogers and Mathias have the very best interest of their beloved school at heart - and agree, disagree, collaborate and work toward that end. I don’t think either has a hidden agenda.</p>

<p>This further quote from the Bloomberg articles sums up much of what was at the heart of the dispute:</p>

<p>“Kim will arrive at a school whose board of trustees and alumni have often split into factions over the actions of Wright, 69. The former president’s critics have questioned his priorities, saying he discouraged conservative views on campus and neglected varsity sports and fraternities.” </p>

<p>Regarding the issue of the speech code, be aware that ugly things were said and done in the name of freedom of speech. That the the speech code was eliminated is good - freedom of speech is a right,
however, that every student be as deserving of respect and as welcome in the Dartmouth community as any other is just as much a right- that is actually part of what makes Dartmouth special and something I
think any student would demand.</p>

<p>This issue actually received a LOT more exposure than you may suppose. You can investigate backwards more if you want… but I wonder how profitable it is to rehash?</p>

<p>Or is it more profitable to take note of what is going on now - if I were a student today, I would be encouraged that the Rogers’ and Mathias’ of the Board all care so much about the college they love but are not, at least at this time, engaged in divisive behavior even as they someitmes disagree. (The lawsuit was harmful to Dartmouth - have no doubt.) I think the school and its students are in very good hands at multiple levels. As far as I can see, Dartmouth remains a special place - not sure I would like to it remain a dinosaur and never ever change in any respect from the place it was 50, 30 even 10 years ago. Your world is not the same world as you parents’ world - nor even that of students 10 years ago. An institution can flex and adapt to remain relevant in a changing world and still preserve that which makes it special. Its good to have different voices guiding the vision and the process.</p>

4

<p>Watching this a a Dartmouth parent over several years, I came to view Wright as a divisive figure.
In my opinion, Kim is the most impressive college president appointment I’ve seen, and to predict, his prestige and whatever he decides to do will trump old arguments and send them into the trash bin of history.</p>

5

<p>This is not news and is largely a dead issue. Much water has gone under the bridge since then. </p>

<p>Bait&Switch needs to get up to date. Now this is news. </p>

<p>[Dartmouth</a> News - Dartmouth receives $50 million commitment to support the visual arts - 06/12/09](<a href=“http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/releases/2009/06/12e.html]Dartmouth”>http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/releases/2009/06/12e.html)</p>

6

<p>^ The bold threadjack is most appreciated. Do you steer every conversation in the direction you so desire?</p>

<p>As I MENTIONED in the original post, I understand that this story is hardly brand new, but I found much less discussion of the issue, in light of its importance, than I think it warranted. The article is also a good read on the politics of higher education. Those things aside, it’s important for new students to be made aware of ‘recent history’ and any burdens and/or baggage that they may be inheriting, no? Now allow me to apologize to our resident internet board addicts, whom find themselves tiresome from all of the re-reading. </p>

<p>“Can’t tell from your comments above whether you think Dr. Kim a good choice or not”</p>

<p>Yes, I think he is a fantastic choice. I suppose following a comment about purpose of education with a quote about his work successes wasn’t clear enough.</p>

7

<p>Bait - guess I am obtuse but I was honestly unclear about your opinion of Dr. Kim. I am incredibly excited for Dartmouth to have Kim as its President and I am glad you are too. I had admiration for the person President Wright was too though - and for some of the direction Dartmouth took under his presidency (I actually think he really nurtured the social/global consciousness of Dartmouth and that, at least in part, led to this phenomenal selection of Dr. Kim.)</p>

<p>Trying not to jump at your other comments - no apologies, however ‘sincere’ are needed<br>
for posting something you find very important (but for post 6, yeah, I would so accept). I just chimed in - in the spirit of your request in post 1.</p>

8

<p>Bait,</p>

<p>Rogers should work directly with President Kim and, if they agree that Dartmouth needs more senior faculty, Kim should hit Rogers up for a cool $50m starter kit to endow 15 new chaired professorships. Adding the equivalent 15 senior faculty, drawn from around the world and dedicated solely to undergraduate teaching, would make a dent in Rogers’ professed quality issue. This is very straightforward. Rogers doesn’t need Board approval to make that decision. He could easily put some grease behind that squeaky wheel. </p>

<p>Rogers and the other cranky Board members should stop screwing around with governance issues and the filing of costly lawsuits against the College and start putting their money where their mouths are. What are wealthy trustees for anyway? They should put up or shut up. They overestimate the College’s need for their wise counsel and conveniently underestimate the College’s desire for their money.</p>

9

<p>Dr. Kim is clearly an amazing individual, and hopefully will be a great president for Dartmouth. The reservation that some have is that his academic strengths are clearly in advanced research, not undergraduate teaching</p>

<p>Compare with last year’s other high-profile presidential appointment, at Northwestern. NU tapped Morty Schapiro of Williams, perhaps the most popular and successful LAC president in the country. At Williams, Dr. Schapiro had a proven track record of hiring faculty and lowering class sizes; he not only expanded the famous two-student tutorials, he was a popular teacher of such tutorials himself. No one doubts that Schapiro is serious about undergraduate education. </p>

<p>It’s obviously too early to evaluate the impacts of the new presidents on their respective institutions. But the general perception is that NU’s pick signals an increased institutional focus on undergraduate teaching. The significance of Dartmouth’s pick in this regard is not as clear.</p>

10

<p>Corbett,</p>

<p>While Morty Shapiro did a great job at Williams, I don’t think he was the model the Board at Dartmouth was going after for D’s next President nor was do I think the Dartmouth gig was a bigger enough step for Shapiro to consider leaving Williams. There was just not a fit here for either party. No need to feel for a moment that we lost out on Morty. </p>

<p>Ths issues Dartmouth faces going forward extend beyond that of our undergraduate program alone and, I think, the Board ultimately got that. In part, the governance battles have been a struggle over the identity or soul of Dartmouth - a college in the old style (a view supported by Rogers et. al.) vs. something evolving but as yet not fully formed - an outstanding undergraduate program informed and influenced by distinguished professional and graduate programs (the admininstation’s and most of the Board’s perspective). And we know who won out, for better or worse. It is a modern, forward-looking view, not an antique, retrospective one. </p>

<p>Williams was not the model here Corbett; Princeton was. It is the stalking horse, the Platonic ideal, the palm at the end of the mind. Dartmouth will pursue it, I am sure, in its own unique way. </p>

<p>The new president was chosen to serve as an intellectual and moral beacon and to set the academic tone for all of Dartmouth, not simply for the undergraduate program. The quality of the undergraduate program is viewed as inextricably tied to the strength of the graduate programs in the Arts & Sciences which need a great deal of attention. I expect that President Kim will face some very hard choices here over what programs to jettison and which ones to invest in and build distinction around (e.g. neuro-science). Tuck and DMS are on much better footing but need focused attention. </p>

<p>Dartmouth will also benefit from better integrative mechanisms between our undergraduate program and those of our professional schools (e.g. Medicine and Business). The work of Jay Bharucha at Tufts was especially interesting to the Board and was instructive here. Kim brings a similarly powerful integrative and cross-disciplinary perspective as demonstarted by his academic work and in his professional accomplishments. I have no doubt that Kim can move on multiple fronts at once and will not see each advance as a zero-sum game (which is how Rogers et.al. frame the game).</p>

<p>Finally, on Kim, most of my peers are incredibly excited to have D led by this man. His life is a model that many of us would like to emulate. His choice to lead D was bold and inspired.</p>

11

<p>

I think you’re probably right on both counts. Ironically, it’s widely rumored that Schapiro was a finalist during the 1998 Dartmouth presidential search. Ultimately Wright was tapped instead, and Schapiro ended up at Williams, where another presidential search was underway. </p>

<p>Given this history, the Williams community followed the current Dartmouth presidential search with some interest. Williams is searching for a president yet again, and no one will be surprised if the next one was also a candidate for the Dartmouth job. But there is no way that Kim would been interested in Williams, or any other LAC. He’s outstanding, but not in a LAC kind of way.</p>

<p>

Again, I think you’re probably right. The ideal envisioned for Dartmouth is likely as a small, undergraduate-focused college accompanied by smaller, but world-class, graduate and professional schools. Princeton is probably closest to this ideal.</p>

<p>The problem with this model: it’s really expensive. Top LACs spend a lot on high-quality teaching, but they don’t usually try to do cutting-edge research. Conversely, top universities spend freely on state-of-the-art research and professional schools, but they typically cut corners on undergraduate teaching. The ideal model would combine the best – but also the most costly – features of both. </p>

<p>In 2008, the Dartmouth endowment was $3.7 billion. Princeton, with about 25% more students, had an endowment of $16.4 billion. Therein lies the challenge with this model. I agree that there may be hard choices ahead.</p>

12

<p>^ It is interesting that the search firm that worked with D’s Board on its search (Issaacson Miller) is advising Williams on theirs. Among the candidates rumored to be in the hunt for the Williams job are one of finalists for the D job, Jay Barucha of Tufts; Catherine Cain Hungerford, Provost at Swarthmore; Brian Rosenberg, Macalester’s President; Elizabeth Kiss, President of Agnes Scott; and Linda Hill, a chaired professor at the Harvard Business School. There is a lot of pressure on the Williams Board to select a woman or a minority for the post. </p>

<p>The job at Williams while high profile, especially in the eyes of its loyal alumni, is not as demanding as the D job. Williams has reached an asymptotic limit on its ability to improve. Improvements will be incremental and come only at the margins. Williams has nearly fulfilled its form as the quintessential liberal arts college. There is not a lot of room to move here. The new president will be a caretaker (note the safe, uninspired choice at Swarthmore) while serving an important symbolic role representing the ideals Williams wishes to communicate to its students, current and future and to its most recent alumni (the next wave of givers).</p>

<p>I agree that that Princeton model is expensive, but money for a school like Dartmouth, even in this environment, is not the scarcest resource. Vision is. I think President Kim will layout a compelling vision for Dartmouth and the money will follow. While my comments about Rogers (above) were satircal and hyperbolic, I don’t think they are far off the mark. Dartmouth (and other schools) must get off this fetish of building brick and mortar and get on with putting its resources against its most valuable resources, its faculty.</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>Are you trying to imply that Northwestern is a “bigger gig” than Dartmouth?</p>

14

<p>^ I was not implying I was stating. </p>

<p>On every dimension Northwestern is bigger. It is a full-fledged university. It has 16,000 students split evenly between undergraduates and graduate students. Its medical and business schools dwarf Dartmouth’s. It has a highly ranked law school. It competes in the Big Ten conference. The breadth and depth of Northwestern’s scale in comparison to Dartmouth is quite significant. One could go on and on. But here’s the real deal. Morty succeeds a guy, Henry Bienen who made $1.8m a year. That is some very serious coin and I bet that opened Morty’s eyes to this “big gig.” Jim Wright BTW makes $500,000 a year.</p>

15

<p>

For 2006-2007, the Williams pres was [reportedly[/url</a>] paid $478,837. The Dartmouth pres was [url=<a href=“http://www.ivygateblog.com/tag/presidents/]reportedly[/url”>http://www.ivygateblog.com/tag/presidents/]reportedly[/url</a>] paid $569,761. </p>

<p>That doesn’t seem like a huge difference. Yet surely there must be more difficult decisions to make, in an environment with higher levels of conflict and stress, at Dartmouth (as suggested above). Is Williams overpaying, or is Dartmouth underpaying ?</p>

<p>Regardless, if Northwestern is prepared to pay their pres around [url=<a href=“http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=36f091aa-c544-40ff-9ac3-9f34f20be5be]$1.7”>http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=36f091aa-c544-40ff-9ac3-9f34f20be5be]$1.7</a> million](<a href=“http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/20/pf/college/college_president_pay/index.htm]reportedly[/url”>More college presidents see pay boost over $500K - Nov. 20, 2006) annually, they are clearly in a different league altogether.</p>

16

<p>D is underpaying, but, strangely, I think its the lowest salary in Ivies. There’s a view that the job (of an Ivy president) is its own reward, – one should feel privleged to serve, etc. </p>

<p>Northwestern is overpaying, but I think the pay reflects the complexity of the job and recognizes the symbolic need to have the President’s salary on par with the other high-rollers with whom they are regularly interacting. They legitimately see the role as a chief executive position. It’s a significant professional step up for Morty. </p>

<p>The Williams salary seems about right. It’s a pretty sweet deal nonetheless.</p>

17

<p>Yale – $900k+
Penn --$800k+
Columbia – $700k+
Brown --$700k
Cornell --$650k+
Princeton – $600k+
Harvard – $600k
Dartmouth --$575k </p>

<p>Plus they get expense accounts ranging from 0 (Brown and D) to $100k+ (Columbia).</p>

18

<p>I would rather live on $575.000 (and reside in that mansion) in New Hampshire than on $700,000 in Manhattan
Overall, I don’t think the Ivy schools compensate this to be a deal breaker between schools. I’m guessing that candidate decisions are made on other grounds.</p>

19

<p>So where did the OP go? He threw some chum in the water and then disappeared. Certainly true to his name.</p>

20

<p>His official first day is tomorrow - July 1st. A new era begins. </p>

<p>This is from the Brown Alumni Magazine.</p>

<p>[Brown</a> Alumni Magazine - Creating Better People](<a href=“http://www.brownalumnimagazine.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2272&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=32]Brown”>http://www.brownalumnimagazine.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2272&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=32)</p>