<p>Popular Princeton Professor will remain on campus.</p>
<p>(excerpt)</p>
<p>"Renowned prospect won't join Harvard
Keohane pleased at Princeton post
By Marcella Bombardieri, Boston Globe Staff </p>
<p>To some professors on campus and Harvard-watchers across the country, Nannerl O. Keohane would be the perfect president for Harvard University.</p>
<p>As a former president at both Duke University and Wellesley College, she is one of the most highly regarded leaders in American higher education. As a member of Harvard's governing board, she knows as well as anyone the unique and momentous task of repairing the university after the troubling fall of Lawrence H. Summers.</p>
<p>But tear up those candidate lists, and hold back the nomination letters.</p>
<p>In a telephone interview yesterday, Keohane said she does not want the job. </p>
<hr>
<p>''I'm not available," she said. ''I want to tell people to please stop putting me on the lists of potential candidates." - - -</p>
<p>She stepped down from Duke in 2004, and has returned to teaching and research as a professor at Princeton University this school year."</p>
<p>Byerly, pardon me for asking, but are you male or female? Ive been wondering that for a long time, but Ive never been able to discern your gender from your name.</p>
<p>"At 65, there's zero chance that she would have been a serious candidate"</p>
<p>Cosar, although Professor Keohane believes that may be true in her case, your comment smacks of blatant age discrimination. The reason the Boston Globe reporter contacted Professor Keohane was that she was continually mentioned as a prime candidate for the position. A number of highly respected individuals have been promoting her. For example, not long ago James F. Jones Jr., president of Trinity College, stated the following about Professor Keohane, People have respected Nan Keohane for 20 years, she would just be the perfect person.</p>
<p>
[quote]
People have respected Nan Keohane for 20 years, she would just be the perfect person.
[/quote]
I have nothing against Nan Keohane. And 20 years ago, she might just have been "the perfect person" for the job. Today she's not, and she would not have been a serious candidate even if she hadn't "withdrawn" her name. It is, however, one more sign of the intensity of interest in Harvard that a major newspaper would make a whole article out of this non-story.</p>
<p>For the Boston Globe, Harvard is right up there with the Red Sox, the Legislature and the Catholic Church as a focus of intense interest. </p>
<p>Not surprising as now, more than ever in the "knowledge-based economy" on which Massachusetts depends, Harvard's doings are of interest to all. Research spinoffs emanating from Harvard and MIT are the source of almost all projected job growth.</p>
<p>Cosar, You are certainly entitled to your opinion, however I disagree with your view that at age 65 one is not fit for a large university presidency. Also, your assertion that "she would not have been a serious candidate even if she hadn't "withdrawn" her name" is not supported by the weight of evidence. Aside from the Boston Globe which considered her a top prospect, Boston's other leading newspaper, the Bostoon Herald, also considered her a prime candidate for the job. </p>
<p>Views outside of Boston were not dissmilar. the New York Sun stated, "Among the names that quickly emerged as leading contenders to replace Mr. Summers were Nannerl Keohane, a member of the board that presided over his hiring and his departure, Lee Bollinger, president of Columbia University, and Drew Faust, dean of the Radcliffe Institute."</p>
<p>Finally, given the circumstances surrounding Mr. Summers' departure, one could hardly call the event a "non story". The media's extraordinary coverage is directly related to the many gaffes made by President Summers. As we all know, these "gaffes" received considerable attention. Clearly this level of media coverage did not exist when Princeton's Provost, Neil Rudentstein was appointed as Harvard's President. Nor did it exist when his successor, then former Secretary Summers, was appointed.</p>
<p>I have never stated that Keohane was the ONLY contender. Different publications have had different preferences, but as noted by the Boston Globe (Boston's top newspaper) Keohane's name kept coming up very often. The Herald, a tabloid, is the smaller and by far the more conservative of the two newspapers. Consistent with its conservative politics, it indicated a preference for Rice but also listed other "accomplished" contenders as "Shirley Ann Jackson, Donna Shalala or Nannerl O. Keohane".</p>
<p>Neither the leftist Globe nor the right-leaning Herald will have a seat on the selection committee.</p>
<p>All this reflects is the great interest the entire Greater Boston community has in everything associated with Harvard - New England's leading cultural institution and economic engine.</p>
<p>I concede that my opinion is not always right, but in this case it is. ;)</p>
<p>Just to be clear, my opinion is not that a 65-year old is not fit for a large university presidency. My opinion is that a 65-year old is not a serious candidate to be the next president of Harvard. The reason has less to do with fitness than with longevity. Harvard picks presidents who can be expected to serve at least 10 years, preferably longer. Replacing a president at Harvard is disruptive to the school and, equally important, disruptive to fundraising. They dont want to have to do it frequently. </p>
<p>Only once in Harvards history has someone over 60 been appointed president that was President Chauncy, who was appointed in 1654 at the age of 62. He subsequently died in office, not a very good precedent. In more recent times, Eliot was 35 when he became president, Lowell was 53, Conant was 40, Pusey was 46, Bok was 41, Rudenstine (thats with an ine) was on the old side at 56, and Summers was 46. It is a fact not an opinion that a 65-year old is not a serious candidate.</p>
<p>As for the weight of the evidence, its just a bunch of newspaper speculation written by reporters who dont know what theyre talking about. The search hasnt even commenced, so they obviously dont have any facts to report. Shalala (65) and Jackson (almost 60) are not serious candidates for the same reason Keohane isnt. Bollinger was considered last time and was passed over in part because he was on the old side (then 54). He hasnt gotten any younger. Elena Kagan (a Princeton summa btw), whose name has also surfaced in the newspaper speculation, is a viable candidate. Shes well respected as dean of HLS and is in her mid-40s. But the odds are that it will end up being someone whose name has not yet been mentioned.</p>
<p>Finally, the non-story to which I was referring isnt Summers departure. Thats a major story. The non-story is the withdrawal from consideration of someone who wasnt being and wouldnt have been considered to replace him.</p>
<p>"its just a bunch of newspaper speculation written by reporters who dont know what theyre talking about."</p>
<p>Cosar, a number of these newspapers are highly regarded, including the Boston Globe which is affiliated with the New York Times. Many of the individuals promoting Keohane have also been highly regarded.
As for age, we can agree to disagree. Personally, I prefer quality (of years) over quantity (of years).</p>
<p>Byerly, your postings are unrelated to the initial post and reflect an uncalled for defensiveness. Please note however that the economic engines that drive Boston are the health and financial services industries followed by insurance and higher education (with Boston University being the city's largest higher ed employer).</p>
<p>The site below will give you a good idea of who and what is driving Boston:</p>
<p>Its not clear whether your comment about the Globes ownership is intended to increase or decrease my faith in its reporters. ;) But I can assure you that it is quite common for reporters, including those at highly regarded newspapers, not to know what theyre talking about. Particularly when they are not even pretending to be reporting facts, but merely speculation.</p>
<p>As for age, you are clearly not listening to what I am saying. I am making a descriptive statement about Harvards policy in picking presidents, not a normative statement about the merits of having a 65-year old president. In any event, I think your choice between quality and quantity is a false dichotomy.</p>
<p>It is always possible for a few reporters to not know what they are talking about, but in this case we have many, many reporters as well as many "knowledgeable educators" all pointing in the same direction. As you can see from this recent Brown University article, the group of potential candidates has always included Professor Keohane, as well as the others mentioned therein.</p>
<p>(exerpt)
The Brown daily Herald
College Roundup
Issue date: 3/22/06 Section: Campus Watch</p>
<p>"Four top candidates for Harvard presidency say they are not interested
Four highly regarded candidates to replace Lawrence Summers as the next president of Harvard University have said they have no interest in the position.</p>
<p>University of Pennsylvania President Amy Gutmann, Columbia University President Lee Bollinger and Tufts University President Lawrence Bacow have told student newspapers at their universities that they are content with their current positions and have no intentions of leaving for Harvard. Nannerl Keohane, former president of Wellesley College and Duke University, said in a March 16 Boston Globe article that she also has no interest in Harvard's presidency.</p>
<p>The four leaders mentioned above have been named as top candidates for the Harvard post by publications including the Globe and the Chronicle of Higher Education"</p>
<p>But another frequently mentioned candidate has not made a statement about her interest in the Harvard spot. Since Summers resigned, the office of Brown President Ruth Simmons has declined to answer any questions regarding Simmons' intentions. After declining to comment to The Herald about "the situation at Harvard" in an e-mail earlier this month, a University spokesman released a statement to the Globe last week: "The president's office declines to comment on any speculation about leadership issues that are taking place at Harvard."</p>
<p>
[quote]
all pointing in the same direction ???
[/quote]
Seems to me that they're all pointing in wildly different directions. Which is the definition of speculation. About the only common thread is that almost every established female academic administrator in the country has been mentioned by some "knowledgeable" reporter or educator as a candidate. And what source does the Brown Daily Herald cite for the proposition that Keohane is/was a candidate? The very same Globe story that started this thread. Hmmm.</p>
<p>Now that we've come full circle, I think it's about time I exited this thread. ;)</p>
<p>We're looking at this from the wrong angle...when you think about it, who WOULD want to be the President of those nutjob self-centered, hostile and ultra-conservative (as in they oppose any change to the system--the actual definition, you know) faculty?</p>
<p>I wouldn't.</p>
<p>Bollinger is happier having to steamroller Harlem residents instead of faculty
Gutmann is happy to be at an institution that happily does her bidding in an effort to better itself
Simmons...who knows</p>