<p>In case anyone missed it, last week AU appointed Neil Kerwin as the university’s new president. You can read about it here: <a href=“http://www.american.edu/president/new/[/url]”>http://www.american.edu/president/new/</a>. He was the dean of the School of Public Affairs when I was a student in the early 1990s. Nice guy, good leader.</p>
<p>I am not expressing any judgment about Dr. Kerwin since I don't feel sufficiently informed about his character, credentials, and capabilities.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, I can't shake the feeling that the whole presidential search seems a bit fishy. Dr. Kerwin has been the interim president of AU for a good while. It seems rather odd that the school conducted a very extensive presidential search for almost a year only to select as the new president (in a unanimous manner at that) a person who has been the acting president for two years and prior to that, the provost, the hierarchical next-in-line under the former president Ladner. This almost makes the whole search process look like a showy stunt that was essentially designed from the beginning to confirm and solidify Dr. Kerwin's tenure as the school's president. </p>
<p>I am aware that this suspicion does not weaken the possibility that Dr. Kerwin indeed was the best candidate among 100+ applicants. However, had the search committee selected as the new president a person who had no ties with the scandalous former administration under Ladner, the university could have had a chance to start fresh without any room for skepticism. I was hoping that the school would be able to head to a new direction under the new president and that he/she would make some notable changes in the way the school is run. While that's still a possibility under Dr. Kerwin, it feels less certain that it is going to be the case.</p>
<p>On the other side, I am certain that Dr. Kerwin has more knowledge about AU than just about anybody else and his impressive history of experience with the school will undoubtedly have a positive impact. In that sense, Dr. Kerwin definitely has something that nobody else can offer. I sincerely hope that he will be able to prove my concerns unwarranted with his great work for many years to come.</p>
<p>I agree with you SW, I felt the school needed to go in a different direction. Kerwin seems like a reasonably nice guy with an optimistic attitude. However, what has he really done for the university? Our biggest complaint/problem that the university has is funding. I think everyone can agree to some extent with this assertion. Kerwin hasn't raised university donations and still seems to embody the spirit of faith in false idealism rather than practical progression. I remember hearing him speak at a freshman welcoming event last year. He actually said in his speech "we may not have as much money as some schools but we sure have spirit". Great Kerwin, I am glad you are optimistic about the student attitude at AU, but the fact of the matter is we still do not have the means necessary to fund important clubs, facilities, and faculty on campus. </p>
<p>I have seen so much about how it is great to have someone as a president that has so much experience on our campus, but I would have liked to see someone come in with more of an emphasis on making our school more well rounded(ie. someone who has a history of building business and science programs at universities).</p>
<p>after following the antics of Ben and the associated press of students and board members and DC public opinion, i am thrilled with the choice of Dr. Kerwin!</p>
<p>Ben did a terrible thing and lost the trust of our alumni but he did raise quite a bit of money and improved the school under his tenure. Dr. Kerwin has never been the president of any college, let alone a school like AU, and I question his leadership qualities. If you look on any of the websites such as studentsreview.com, many students complain about the horrible mismanagement of the AU administration -- so why take one of your own if everyone hates it? I actually know of specific alumni who refuse to donate any money to AU in part because of Ladner, but also because of the existing bureaucracy and the direction the school is going. Did I ever hear Kerwin as interim talk about improving the sciences at AU? No. Did I ever really hear anything about ways to increase our endowment? Yeah, a 6% increase in tuition and room and board.</p>