<p>Now that Ms. Tilghman has been president of Princeton for 4 years, what would people say are her major visions for Princeton, and -- if 4 years are enough -- what have been her major accomplishments so far?</p>
<p>Well, it was under her leadership that princeton implemented its solely grant-based aid policy.</p>
<p>And for that, I and many others adore her.</p>
<p>Also, she did an admirable job of putting Mr. Summers in his place last winter. :p</p>
<p>In the past couple of years, she has worked hard (and effectively) in diversifying the student body as well. The four-year residential college programs beginning in 2007 are one result of her efforts -- they're the subject of much controversy, though I can't deny that it's a major accomplishment. More recently, she's been stressing the university's unofficial motto, "Princeton in the Nation's Service" to incite students to become more directly involved in the community.</p>
<p>The planning for this system began long before Shirley Tilghman's tenure. Fund-raising for it actually began in the mid 1980s at the latest, under Harold Shapiro, and the first visible steps were taken when Princeton Inn College was converted to Forbes College, and when Wilson College was created. Tilghman of course continued the implementation of this process, which is no mean feat in itself, but cannot take credit for it at the plane of Vision (with a capital "V").</p>
<p>The replacement of loans by grants -- is that a policy initiated by Tighlman? Clearly it happened under her watch and with her approval, but was it Tighlman's initiative, or was it Rapeley's, or even Hargadon's? Anyone with good information on that?</p>
<p>Tighlman has done a great job of eradicating male positions within the university. Almost every school at Princeton is under female leadership...white female leadership too. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing...but it seems as if Princeton is going to extreme measures to put more women into the university.</p>
<p>This should incite some good discussion...</p>
<p>Also, Pton's recent grade deflation policy (limiting A's to 35%) happened on her watch.</p>
<p>Indeed the new grading policy was announced and implemented under Tilghman's watch, but it is Nancy Malkiel who is most visibly associated with this policy, so again it isn't clear whether this policy was actually part of Tilghman's vision for Princeton.</p>
<p>Maybe it is Tilghman's leadership style to operate behind the scenes and shun the limelight?</p>
<p>Tilghman came in in May 2001: <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/pr/smt/bio.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.princeton.edu/pr/smt/bio.html</a> The Class of 2005 was the first no-loan class: <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S11/69/41A99/index.xml?section=newsreleases%5B/url%5D">http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S11/69/41A99/index.xml?section=newsreleases</a> This policy was implemented in January 2001: <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/01/q1/0127-aid.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/01/q1/0127-aid.htm</a></p>
<p>Tilghman is known for her skill at bringing in big donors. Getting Meg Whitman to pony up for the new residential college was a coup. Tilghman is controversial on campus and, frankly, disliked by many students for her grade deflation and anti-eating club stances. In my view she has targeted some worthwhile issues but imposed her views in a way that comes across as tactless and even negative toward her own students. It's great to have a woman scientist at the helm, and her recent change of the tenure policy to make it more friendly toward young women faculty is admirable. She is not, however, good at talking to students in a way that conveys vision and leadership. Given all the studies that have come out about women and their collaborative management style, this is disappointing.</p>
<p>1) The change in tenure policy for having children applies to men and women equally.
2) On grade deflation, such a major policy could not have been implemented without her strong support. It is interesting that the other elite school presidents don't have the moxy to take on the faculty and student body on this hot topic.
3) On unpopularity with eating clubs, she simply doesn't want 'binge drinking' resulting in deaths on her watch. I think most prudent managers would stop courting the eating club constituency (undergrads and alums) and start cracking down on this dangerous activity. Like every corporate america holiday party, what went on 25 years ago doesn't cut it anymore. She is not paid to be necessarily popular. It is good to see her finish what Woodrow Wilson couldn't do, control the eating clubs. It is refreshing to see her make decisions not just by seeing how the polls react but on whether the policy is right.</p>
<p>Wsox, the admin is now working much more effectively with the eating clubs. Clearly someone recognized that how poorly they were handling things initially. There is much more to the binge drinking problem than the eating clubs. Many students point out that drinking at Princeton is safer than at many schools, because they are not in cars and they are drinking beer in the eating clubs. They also point out that hard liquor is consumed in the dorms before students go out to the Street. </p>
<p>It is true that the new tenure policy affects both male and female young parents. However, women continue to bear the larger share of infant parenting the policy was a deliberate effort to right the wrong that currently exists in academia, where the vast majority of tenured faculty are male. So...it's a good change.</p>
<p>I agree that leaders should not make decisions based on the way polls react. However, an effective leader has the capacity to <em>inspire</em> others to share his or her vision.</p>
<p>I am not buying the party line there is more to the 'binge drinking problem than the eating clubs." There is no excuse for 18 or 19 year old drinking beer in a quasi school facility! Tolerating such behavior could lead someone to conclude the school tacitly condones behavior that can kill someone. Ms T. gets it and she is very articulately addressing the problem.</p>
<p>I don't care where they pregame...there should be no underage drinking implicitly or explicitly endorsed by the school. Yes, Princeton is better than most others. Hoever, too many kids spend a night at McCosh to let that lame rationalization fly. Trying to 'inspire' is fine for some topics. Matters of public safety are NOT one of them. Eating clubs are 'working more effectively" with the administration because they are realizing the huge personal liability club officers face. There are carrot items and stick items. This is a stick item.</p>
<p>No offense to the previous poster, but those sound like the words of someone who's simply not a fan of drinking. </p>
<p>"There is no excuse for 18 or 19 year old drinking beer in a quasi school facility! Tolerating such behavior could lead someone to conclude the school tacitly condones behavior that can kill someone."</p>
<p>Yes there is. Drinking, like it or not (and you apparently don't), is a big part of life for many people. College is about more than book knowledge - it's about social skills, and learning how to interact with people. Princeton trains one for the adult world. A big part of the adult world is knowing what you can handle. Of course, everyone is free to simply not drink, but if they choose to, this is as much a preparation for their future employed life as is Psych 101.</p>
<p>How many kids have died of alcohol at Princeton in recent memory? Hm? Big revelation: Princeton also condones driving, as well as eating. You have a much higher risk of dying in THAT behavior - driving - than you ever would in a controlled, relatively safe, car-free social environment surrounded by dozens of friends. You can also die of indigestion, or having food stuck in your windpipe. A college that doesn't tacitly condone "behaviors that can kill someone" would have a bunch of kids sitting in plastic bubbles, burning tuition money while they slowly decay.</p>
<p>So feel free to oppose drinking, but your hyped-up charges against the Life-Threatening Evil of Drinking sound like the words of someone who simply doesn't know how to enjoy a good beer after a week of hard studying.</p>
<p>Even though I am most likely going to go to Harvard, I was very impressed by Princeton and by Mrs. Tilghman. She's on the Board of Trustees adn the Jackson Research Laboratory in Mt. Desert Island, Maine. Very neat science lady!</p>
<p>Antoine: It doesn't matter what my or your value system is. Drinking is against the law for 18 and 19 year olds. People who enable minors to drink are breaking the law and possibly harming the minor. If you don't like it change the law or go to school in Europe.</p>
<p>You ask for dead bodies. There are a lot of them, just not many at Pton. Ask any college medical officer. McCosh takes in the 'party hearty' crowd regularly so your "social skills" students can sleep it off and not choke to death on their own vomit. The problem is some minors don't have a beer after a week of hard studing, they have many, many beers.</p>
<p>BTW your analogy is wrong. The biggest source of automobile deaths is drinking. I think your arguments work against you.</p>
<p>Speeding, jaywalking, and parking for more than the posted time are also illegal. I do all of them regularly. My point? The fact that there is a set drinking age of 21 in this country reflects on the puritanical and outdated mores of the Midwest and South. It does matter what my value system is. I am ardently against drinking when cars or other dangerous circumstances are involved. Common sense dictates that when there is a safe environment full of responsible, intelligent Princeton students, one can independently determine one's own limits. Why do European countries have lower drinking ages? Because young adults there don't drive nearly as often is a major, major reason. At Princeton, nobody is driving. The kinds of kids who go there aren't going to decide to take a roadtrip after getting drunk on the Street. The fact that there have been no alcohol-related deaths speaks to the student body's ntelligence. Just as I see no reason to go 60 mph on an empty stretch of rural interstate, I (and most students) see no reason to not drink when it is done responsibly.
My analogy wasn't meant to analyze national dying trends. My point was (I think obviously) that a minor is much more endangered when he or she steps into a car than when he or she steps into a regulated environment like an eating club, surrounded by his friends and peers.
I'm not asking "for dead bodies." I'm not Dracula.
I'm talking about Princeton, not all colleges. What you're saying may very well hold true for many universities, but certainly not for Princeton. The people who go there tend not to be the kind that transform into dypsomaniacal zombies with a couple beers. They're smart, successful people looking to party with their friends. I doubt that any Pton students are drowning in their vomit. If so, let them take it as a personal lesson from the real world. Whether you like it or not, 18- and 19-year olds are going to drink. They have and always will. When drinking is done responsibly, as Princeton students have shown they do, it is a fun, social way to enjoy college. I'm sorry if you had a bad drinking experience or are simply a prude out to judge people who drink based on no experience of your own, but I feel that at Princeton, after hard work (to get in and to stay in), a beer, or even several, is more than deserved.</p>
<p>why do you need a beer to party? Just asking....
Perhaps the gals aren't pretty enough without the aid of beer goggles? Just a suggestion....</p>
<p>You don't. For me, partying with a beer happens to be fun. Partying without a beer is also fun. What annoys me is people who are adamantly opposed to drinking who have never tried it. Don't judge something you have no basis to judge.</p>
<p>Actually, Tilghman herself went on record (last year, if I remember correctly), stating that she is against the current drinking law as it doesn't allow college admins to foster an environment in which drinking in moderation occurs.</p>
<p>My objection to her is not so much about her attitude toward drinking. It is the way she came across -- until enough of the students and alums made loud protests -- as hostile to so much of the Princeton student experience.</p>
<p>I should point out that applying pressure on eating clubs is not new with president Tilghman. It has gone on for decades. I don't think all eating clubs will eventually vanish, but there is no question that more will disappear before the end of this decade.</p>
<p>I would like to hear more about NEW directions towards which Tilghman is taking Princeton.</p>