Students Consider Presidential Search

In the wake of President of the College Ronald D. Liebowitz’s announcement that he will resign in 2015, students at the College have been considering the qualities they hoped for in the next president of the College, and also about the role of the student body in the selection process of the new president.

According to an April 2004 article in the Campus, the search that resulted in Liebowitz’s selection as President began with interviews of “approximately 300 to 400 qualified candidates for the position” by a 16-member search committee that included faculty, staff, trustees, alumni and student representatives. The committee submitted a single recommendation to the Board of Trustees, which voted unanimously to accept the recommendation.

During the 2004 search, the only student representative on the search committee was Erin Sullivan ’04, who was student co-chair of Community Council at the time. The December 2013 press release announcing Liebowitz’s resignation stated that the Board of Trustees will “provide information about a presidential search following the February board meeting.”

Vice President for Communications Bill Burger declined to comment on the search process, but wrote in an email that the process will be an “inclusive one.”

Students interviewed by the Campus expressed high expectations for the new president and for student involvement in the search process. Tianfeng He ’16 said that he hoped the process would make candidates available for student interaction and evaluation, and suggested hosting candidates for lunch with students in the dining halls.

Ian Ackerman ’16 agreed, noting that the opportunity to meet candidates for the position would help to ensure that the president would be someone accessible to students, but he acknowledged that the selection process is quite complex and thus mass student-candidate interaction may be impractical.

Students interviewed by the Campus also expressed a strong interest in a president who takes an active role in the lives of students, with some citing the precedent set by Liebowitz as an ideal.

“[Liebowitz] was very personable and made an effort to be available — at a school like this, where people are driven to try to effect change, personal contact is valuable,” Clare Ulrich ’14.5 said.

Isabel Tyler ’13.5 echoed Ulrich’s statement and the importance of a personable president, stating that “the president’s role is to facilitate conversation on important issues on campus.”

Few students were able to articulate specific goals for the College’s next president to aspire to.

Tianfeng He, however, cited the Pass/Fail option as an example of one of Liebowitz’s successes, as its primary purpose is to aid the student body.

Ackerman also hopes for a president who will “decrease bureaucratic red tape,” highlighting the process to drop a class after the Add/Drop period has passed as a situation where “[he would] like to see someone who will tear down some of those [bureaucratic] walls.”