Ideas into Action, Action into Service

text-only page produced automatically by LIFT Text Transcoder

HOME

TEXT ONLY

15 Point Plan American University
Speech by Dr. Benjamin Ladner, President on October 3, 2001

I
t is startling and nearly unbelievable to remind ourselves that we are only a few weeks into this semester. Even if nothing else had happened, it has been difficult to absorb two great losses suffered by the AU community during this brief period. Stefan Pitts, a popular freshman, died tragically while jogging; and Professor Nina Roscher, a pillar of this institution for nearly three decades, recognized in a White House ceremony as a national leader in educating women and minorities in science, died of cancer. Embedded deeply somewhere between the bright hopes of a freshman pursuing his dreams and a woman whose life helped so many to realize their dreams is the whole meaning of American University. Anything else I will say today is mere gloss on that remarkable and irreducible fact.

But, as we know, something else did happen. In the whirlwind of events unleashed by the tragedies of September 11, the AU community—as if by some prearranged but unspoken agreement—tapped into a rich, inexhaustible reservoir of shared humanity. Spontaneously, everyone found some way to help; to console; to share the burdens of anxiety, fear, uncertainty, and grief; to interpret perplexing, colliding ideologies; to convey expertise; and in a thousand different ways to affirm the triumph of tolerance over prejudice, understanding over ignorance, compassion over pain, and faith over despair.

Just before classes began, at the concluding event for the Freshman Service Experience, assistant vice president and dean of students Faith Leonard leaned over to me and whispered, “You know, at college campuses all over America pep rallies are being held for the start of football season. I’ll bet AU is the only one that’s holding a pep rally for service!” I want to thank all of you for what you have done in the past few weeks since the pep rally. There is reason to celebrate the spirit of American University. And I might add, if anyone anywhere on this campus ever again utters the words, “There’s no spirit at AU,” they will be publicly flogged with a hundred balloons!

Another example of the remarkable AU spirit has been expressed over the past year in our campus conversations on the future of our university. Responding to rapid changes within and outside higher education since the development of our Statement of Common Purpose and Strategic Plan a few years ago, the conversations centered on a single, overarching question: “Which priorities will enable us to build a distinctive, high-quality academic community for the long term?” That question must now be answered against the background of September 11, which cannot be viewed only as an isolated phenomenon. The world is now a very different place, with serious repercussions for how we prepare our students to understand and inhabit it.

From the rich mix of ideas and perspectives generated by the conversations, there was general consensus that it is time for AU to develop a stronger, clearer, more purposeful direction. The question is, should we keep things essentially as they are, with minimal change, or should we make significant changes that will set us apart as a distinctive university?

After the process of consultation in which we have been engaged, I am now convinced that AU must make significant changes. Trying to maintain the operation of the university in its present form will, over time, diminish our vitality, our quality, and our prospects for the future. Already we are stretched dangerously thin in such vital areas as facilities and services for student housing, health care, and activities; professional support for faculty; fellowships for graduate students; technology requirements; and an unhealthy reliance on a staff willing to work long hours.

Not surprisingly, we have developed a tendency to focus more on financial affairs than academic priorities and to use growth as the measure of our success. Because our revenues are heavily dependent upon tuition, we must then grow enrollments to increase revenue. As enrollments grow, we must add more space, staff, programs, and faculty, which then must be paid for by growing enrollments to increase revenue. Over time, this cycle has become an operating assumption that has made us vulnerable to the lure of misplaced priorities.

FULFILLING THE PARADIGM

I
t is time now to pursue a different course, one that will mobilize our strengths and transform American University into an academically distinctive, intensely engaged community. Our primary obligation will always be to prepare a generation of leaders who are broadly educated, spiritually deep, passionately engaged, and capable of translating in a complex and dangerous environment the lasting values of truth, beauty, and goodness, which are the hallmarks of a humane and civilized world. Clarifying and extending the paradigm of the university in new ways will enable us to meet this obligation more effectively.

The paradigm for American University is expressed in the Statement of Common Purpose: “its [AU’s] distinctive feature, unique in higher education, is its capacity as a national and international university to turn ideas into action and action into service.” Our challenge now is to fulfill the meaning of this paradigm in new and specific ways. We will do this by implementing three integrated priorities:

the quality of academic inquiry
the quality of student experience
the quality of extensive engagement with Washington and global affairs

Instead of being one of several very good universities in our nation’s capital, AU will stand out because of our distinctive capacity and single-minded commitment to connect people in creative and challenging ways to a superb, interactive faculty and to a caring campus community that is ethically motivated and intensely engaged with this city and with global issues.

There is no such thing as a generic university, despite the fact that many universities try to reflect what they imagine one might be. In truth, there is only one compelling, unrelenting challenge that every university must meet, and do so with its own unique resources. It is the challenge to transform lives through insight and understanding, to embolden individuals not just to discover but to enact knowledge, and to free them to claim the full measure of themselves as intellectually curious, spiritually enlivened, morally responsible, compassionate human beings. Every student has the right to expect the university to provide sufficient resources to answer the question, “What is the meaning of my life and how can I fulfill the promise of that meaning in the modern world?”

To meet this challenge, our campus environment must take on the character of what Henry Glassie found in the artistic tradition of Turkish potters:

. . . they do not speak of passing things along, but of breathing in the air. You live in a cultural environment, and the air you breathe circulates through you to emerge in actions that are yours alone but can be called traditional because you created them out of the general experience of life in some place . . . . The tradition that binds you is like the air around you, sustaining you . . . . [Henry Glassie, Turkish Traditional Art Today (Indiana U. Press, 1993), 528-30]

We must create our own special “tradition that binds us” to this place—a place with experiences so profound and exciting that when students leave, they will miss it as much as the air they breathe; a place where the power and relevance of values embedded in the whole range of human history and experience will shape the unfolding of the rest of their lives.

STRATEGIC CHANGES WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY

F
ulfilling the meaning of the AU paradigm under these priorities will require fundamental changes. Most of the changes were suggested in the conversations; faculty, staff, students, alumni, and trustees will identify others in the coming weeks and months.

First, we will undertake and complete the largest and most successful fund-raising campaign in AU’s history. In fact, the “quiet phase” of the campaign is already underway. I am acutely aware of the times—the economy is bad, the aftermath of the recent national tragedy has yet to run its course, and we have a very long list of needs. Nevertheless, not only must we press ahead with the campaign, we must do it with gusto and supreme confidence in the kind of university we are creating. Those who join us will find it inspiring and personally ennobling to build such a university. Alumni, staff, trustees, faculty, parents, students, and friends must catch the spirit of our new commitment to turn AU into a distinctly different and much higher-quality institution. Then, individual by individual, group by group, they must step forward and contribute the financial resources needed to realize our dream. This campaign will be the indispensable underpinning of our ability “to turn ideas into action and action into service.”

Second, we will become a smaller university. The future growth of American University will be a growth in quality. We will invest more resources in fewer areas in order to raise quality dramatically and become an intensely engaged, student-centered community. This will result in much higher-quality students, faculty, staff, and programs, as well as higher standards, rewards, and accountability. Smaller, more selective enrollment targets will anticipate the changing demographics that, within a few years, will present a smaller pool of potential applicants. Our freshmen enrollments will likely stay in the low 1200s over the next three years as we become more selective. After that, we will reduce the size of the freshman class and the acceptance rate, and maintain smaller entering classes permanently.

Third, the undergraduate experience will become the central focus of the university. Our primary institutional reputation will be anchored in a new, very selective, high-quality, interdisciplinary undergraduate program for freshmen and sophomores, known as University College. Special programs and services will be developed to ensure that all AU undergraduates are grounded in a distinctive campus culture of high-quality academic inquiry, ethical awareness, and intense engagement in Washington and abroad. The provost will convene a project team to begin the work of creating the college.

Fourth, there will be significantly fewer master's and doctoral programs but with much higher academic quality and support. The standards for retaining doctoral programs in particular will be, first, whether they contribute significantly, with high quality and high demand, to AU’s distinctive identity; and second, whether they are or will likely become a truly prestigious national program within five years. This standard will allow some programs to expand slightly, while others will consolidate or disappear.

Fifth, as a smaller university, we will reduce costs and increase operational efficiency. We will systematically eliminate bureaucracy and red tape, consolidate services, eliminate overlapping positions, outsource appropriate services, and increase our use of management technology. The net effect will be a significant reduction in our operating costs over the next three years. By then, there will also be fewer but more highly paid staff.

Sixth, we will add to our reputation as a Washington-based, global university. We will expand our academic, experiential learning opportunities in Washington and reward faculty who supervise these for-credit activities. Also, the provost will work with the faculty to develop a new requirement of 12 hours of experiential education for all AU students.

Our commitment to become the premier global university in the United States remains firm. Several activities and services will be consolidated under an Office of Global Affairs and some World Capital Program sites abroad will be developed as multipurpose branches of AU to extend our presence and operations abroad. We will develop new academic offerings and service-learning initiatives and pursue academic diplomacy and conflict resolution opportunities in global contexts. As recommended by a recent faculty report, a new Global Studies track will be developed for the General Education Program, which should include a requirement for all freshmen to take at least two Global Studies courses, including an interdisciplinary course on Global Studies. I am also asking the faculty to develop a new Global Studies curriculum as a major.

Seventh, faculty teaching, research, and service will have added meaning and resources. We will raise the bar of performance and broaden the base of support that makes exceptional performance possible in these areas.

Teaching. It is the faculty—not the library, not students, not the endowment—that is the rich, irreplaceable resource of the university, sine qua non. It is their passionate search for truth and understanding, with and for students, that is the central focus of university life, whether students are eager young learners or seasoned academic colleagues. Therefore, excellent teaching must be the paramount intellectual activity at AU. If we are to enhance the total experience of our students, we will need to enlarge the scope and impact of teaching both within and outside classroom settings. Therefore, we will increase support for new modes of teaching and more extensive pedagogical relations between faculty in different disciplines, departments, and schools. Faculty will be rewarded for inspired, effective teaching in all its forms. The provost will lead an effort to develop new ways to encourage, identify, and reward such teaching.
Research. Just as there are different modes of teaching, there are different modes of research. Although the conventional notion of research is tied only to publications, our model of research will be broadened to include scholarly initiatives that integrate the fruits of research more directly and creatively into the life of the campus. All faculty must fulfill a professional obligation to be widely read, conversant with a broad scope of current knowledge from different sources, and able to demonstrate the outcome of that knowledge among their peers, whether in significant publications or in other high-quality forms. Our faculty reward system should take account of both kinds of research and their demonstrated impact on enhanced student learning. A key component of this effort will be the continued upgrading of the quality of the University Library. The hard work of establishing a consistent standard of evidence for new forms of research will need to be developed by the faculty, and the provost will work with a special project team to develop such standards. At the same time, we will increase support for gifted researchers whose research consistently conveys truly significant new insights and appears in influential publications. In order to spur the development of both kinds of research, I am committing $500,000 to establish a fund for Presidential Research Fellowships for individual faculty to increase their scholarly activities. Three fellows will be selected competitively each year to receive significant support to complete high-level research in published form, and three will be selected to receive support to complete research that will be presented in other forms. This fund will be targeted for growth in our capital campaign.
Service. The requirement of faculty service cannot be allowed to languish as an ill-defined and seemingly inconsequential component of the teaching-research-service triad. The ideal of service within and on behalf of the university will now be defined primarily as service to students, which must be demonstrated through sustained, formal and informal contacts that go beyond and augment the classroom experience. By “contacts” I mean personal relationships in which students are educated not only by the discipline of a field of study but also by the intangible benefits of apprenticeship and support that come only through direct relations with academic mentors in a variety of settings. The task of creating, coordinating, and evaluating such settings must be developed collectively, and I am asking the provost and the vice president of student services to convene a project team to address this issue.

Eighth, the number of adjunct faculty will be reduced sharply, with no more than 10 percent of undergraduate courses taught by adjuncts. We will increase the number of full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty; reduce the number of extraneous course sections and special topic offerings; and consolidate or terminate some graduate programs and redeploy faculty to teach undergraduate courses. Adjunct teaching in doctoral programs will be eliminated and will not exceed 5 percent of courses offered at the master’s level. All adjunct faculty must qualify for our “in-residence” status that requires involvement in the university beyond teaching one or two courses. The total size of the regular faculty will be adjusted to fit the size of the student body, the replacement of adjunct faculty, and the reduction of some graduate programs and expansion of others.

Ninth, we will establish a system of differential teaching and research loads for faculty. The provost will be charged to work with the faculty to develop such a system. One model for consideration could be that each year, faculty members select either a “Normal Load” of five courses, and demonstrate teaching and research excellence in and outside the classroom; a “Teaching Load” of four courses, and demonstrate superior teaching and the development of new teaching strategies that can benefit other faculty; or a “Research Publication Load” of three courses demonstrating high-level scholarship that is likely to become a truly significant publication with a major impact on the direction of a field.

Tenth, the academic advising system will be restructured significantly and will become the single most important administrative service to students. As part of the restructuring, deans will designate at least six faculty per school or college to participate in a significant way in the advising process related to their schools and colleges. This can be one means for faculty to meet their service obligations to students. The provost and vice presidents of enrollment services and student services will lead a project team that will recommend a restructured system with a significant training component.

Eleventh, we will enhance our profile as a values-based institution, emphasizing long-held university commitments to such values as human rights and dignity, social justice, environmental protection, diversity, and individual freedom. We will promote linkages of academic inquiry to service opportunities locally and around the world for faculty, staff, and students. I am urging the faculty to expand academic offerings to include more specific ethical issues in connection with all fields of inquiry. Diversity will continue to be a hallmark of the institution in its makeup and its concerns.

Twelfth, a new Office of Campus Life will be created, headed by the current vice president of student services. It will oversee most of the activities of the current office of student services, plus a range of consolidated campus services designed to enhance campus life generally for students, faculty, and staff. It will provide more effective and efficient services to students in particular.

Thirteenth, a new model of governance will be created to provide a more flexible, consultative, and efficient system of decision making. The provost will work with a special project team to continue the recent emphasis of Senate chairs to develop a smaller, more efficient body. I propose that the current University Senate be replaced by a new and smaller Faculty Council, comprised of faculty only, and focused exclusively on academic and faculty issues, especially as they relate to the implementation of university priorities. The role of the provost, designated by the University Bylaws as chair of the university faculty, should be commensurate with that responsibility. Short-term, issue-based project teams could be appointed to research issues and make recommendations within three to six months. At the same time, I will establish a new University Council comprised of faculty, staff, and students to advise the president on university issues. The President’s Council (comprised of the President’s Cabinet and the Provost’s Council) will meet regularly, and will hold two open forums each year for discussions with the community at large.

Fourteenth, a new University Enterprise Center will be established under the direction of the vice president of finance and treasurer to pursue institutional development through financial opportunities. The center will initiate and coordinate opportunities in connection with deans, faculty, staff, and trustees to enhance the financial health and growth of the university.

Fifteenth, and finally, we should take seriously our responsibility to encourage physical fitness throughout our community. I am certainly aware of the difficulty of adding requirements, of the challenges of space and schedules, and of the presumed status of fitness activities as a purely private matter. Nevertheless, the value of physical fitness is hardly peripheral to our best understanding of living a meaningful, healthy life. I propose that we find new ways to validate this truth and to include in the educational experience of our students habits of fitness that integrate a sound mind with a sound body. I will appoint a new project team jointly led by the vice president of development and the vice president of student services to explore this issue.

CONCLUSION

These are the major changes that will enable us to fulfill the promise of our distinctive university paradigm that turns ideas into action and action into service.

To meet this challenge, we will begin immediately to establish the three institutional priorities and implement the changes I have cited, even as we work out specific details and consider other changes. I urge all of you, as we did in the campus conversations, to take responsibility for infusing these priorities with creative energy over the coming weeks and months.

Alfred North Whitehead, commenting on the dangers of orthodoxy in the university, once wrote:

. . . our danger is exactly the same as that of the older system [the scholasticism of the late medieval period]. Unless we are careful, we shall conventionalize knowledge. Our literary criticism will suppress initiative. Our historical criticism will conventionalize our ideas of the springs of human conduct. Our scientific systems will suppress all understanding of the ways of the universe which fall outside their abstractions. Our ways of testing will exclude all the youth whose ways of thought lie outside our conventions of learning. In such ways the universities, with their scheme of orthodoxies, will stifle the progress of the race, unless in some fortunate stirrings of humanity they are in time remodeled or swept away. [Essays in Science and Philosophy]

We are about to undertake a “remodeling” of American University to reflect the “stirrings of humanity” that connect the AU community to the deepest springs of human thought, emotion, understanding, and action. “There is only one subject-matter for education,” Whitehead concluded, “and that is Life in all its manifestations.” For an entire university to enact that kind of education is full of risk; but, in the end, it is the only task large enough and important enough to demand the investment of our lives in this place.

Adopted by the Board of Trustees, November 16, 2001

Text Only Options