EFTA00605675.pdf

by H enry R osovsky , Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Emeritus, RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES: American Exceptionalism? R Editor’s Note: These remarks were prepared for the Carnegie Corporation/TIME Summit on Higher Education, September 20, 2013. I. A Paradox 1, 2012, issue of The Economist pro- and the system that invests in and Domestically, American higher ed- vides a recent example. The headline trains young people to be leading sci- ucation is the subject of almost unprec- announced: “Not what it used to be: entists and scholars, that distinguishes edented criticism. “Too expensive and American universities represent declin- them and makes them the envy of the inefficient and not a good investment” ing value for money to their students.” is a common conclusion. Students are In the text there is little recognition said to be unprepared for the job mar- of the tremendous diversity of higher ket. Higher education is accused of education in the United States.) The In the United States, being too permissive in tolerating low label “American universities” has little faculty productivity and in resisting the meaning when our country is home to it makes no sense technological revolution. In general, more than 4,000 tertiary institutions, the current “business model” is judged ranging from those that might actually to speak about unsustainable: some think that we are be the envy of the world to those barely riding on the road to self-destruction. distinguishable from high schools— “higher education” The United States confronts great social with a tremendous variety in between. and economic problems, yet—in Arthur At the top of our higher education or “universities” Levine’s gloomy words—“public and pyramid we find the public and private opinion leaders alike view [universities] research universities with their special in general—and as more of a problem than a solution.”1 But in international discussions role of creating and maintaining knowl- edge, training graduate students in arts yet it happens and evaluations of higher education, American universities are frequently and sciences and professional schools, and offering a liberal education to un- all the time. called “the envy of the world.” Not by dergraduates. According to Jonathan any means all our universities. Indeed Cole, there are about 125 diverse uni- world.”2 These 125 universities play a not very many, but some—and that is versities that fit this description and less singular role in undergraduate edu- my point. they “…are able to produce a very cation. As Cole again points out, some In the United States, it makes no high proportion of the most important American liberal arts colleges are able sense to speak about “higher educa- fundamental knowledge and practical to offer undergraduate education of tion” or “universities” in general—yet research discoveries in the world. It is equal quality. I agree, but the nature of it happens all the time. (The December the quality of the research produced, the educational experience is different: 1 “Today’s Unpresidential Presidents,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 26, 2012. 2 The Great American University, 2009, p. 5 Wi n t e r 2 0 1 4 — c a r n e g i e r e p o r t e r 59  for undergraduates, the research uni- we are using accepted but necessarily faculty sharing authority in specified versity might be compared to life in a questionable measures with the poten- areas with appointed administrators and big city with a great diversity of inhab- tial to lessen our status as world leaders. trustees, the latter holding final author- itants—undergraduates, graduate stu- All systems of international university ity. This is a distinctly American form dents, professional school students, and rankings agree that U.S. universities of shared governance, which relies on a faculty reflective of that diversity—and dominate the top twenty or thirty places. strong executive. Presidents, provosts, the liberal arts college comparable to a (Twenty-two out of thirty in the Times and deans possess and exercise consid- more homogeneous and community- Higher Education survey and twenty- erable authority over budgets, institu- oriented small town populace. Each has three out of thirty in the Shanghai Jiao tional priorities, and many other matters its own advantages for under­graduates. Tong ranking; both in 2013.) of consequence. This may be contrasted It is unlikely that American domi- with the so-called “continental model” nance is accidental, but a convincing that features what, in its purist form, can explanation would have to be extremely only be described as “participatory de- A major component complicated. History, wars, culture and mocracy”—faculty elections of rectors customs, and resources are all involved. and deans, and policy decisions some- of education is But all the institutions at the top of the times placed in the hands of assemblies American educational pyramid—and based on the principle of parity: fac- real as opposed to some others as well—share six char- ulty, students, and employees sharing acteristics closely associated with high authority. In my opinion, this form of virtual encounters quality. (My initial preference was to governance has been a great obstacle to call these “necessary conditions,” but progress, and while it is very difficult between students that seemed a bit too rigorous.) Their to generalize, it seems that even conti- absence would preclude—or make it nental practice is moving toward greater and teachers much more difficult—for research uni- executive authority. to encourage versities to achieve the highest quality, not just in this country but anywhere More than a decade ago, I had the opportunity to study universities in de- participation and else. Indeed, their partial or total ab- sence abroad helps to explain why veloping countries all over the world while preparing a report for the World critical thinking. there are relatively few foreign—es- pecially non-Western—institutions Bank and UNESCO.4 Problems and issues varied enormously depend- represented at the top of the accepted ing on economic conditions, politi- “Top of the pyramid”—my sole surveys.3 None of the six character- cal system, history, etc. But those who focus here—does not mean that institu- istics is wholly unambiguous; all are were in charge of universities almost tions below the top are less worthy, less blurry. But is not difficult to detect their always agreed on one point: poor sys- deserving of private or public support, presence or absence. tems of university governance were the or less essential in the national scheme greatest obstacles to institutional im- of higher education. Nor does it imply II. Six Characteristics of Quality provement—more so than inadequate that the current storm of criticism is n Shared governance. First, these financing or anything else. Of course, irrelevant for research universities. I institutions all practice shared gover- poor governance meant many different completely understand the need for con- nance: the trustees and president condi- things but certainly included interfer- trolling costs and expanding capacity. tionally delegate educational policy to ence by ministries of education, unclear But it does mean that criticisms have the faculty. That would primarily include lines of authority and perhaps, most im- to be as differentiated as the range of curriculum and the initial selection of portant, barriers to faculty input or ini- institutions: unless that happens, inap- those who teach, are admitted to study, tiative. It would be a mistake to believe propriate remedies may damage a sec- and do research. The administrative that poor governance applies only to tor of American higher education where style is collegial rather than top-down, the developing world. Similar obstacles 3 For a very recent confirmation of this point, one need only look at Michele Lamont and Anna Sun’s op-ed, “How China’s Elite Universities Will Have to Change,” in The Chronicle of Higher Education, December 14, 2012. 4 Higher Education in Developing Countries: Peril and Promise, 2000. 60 c a r n e g i e r e p o r t e r — Wi n t e r 2014 have slowed quality growth in European institutions that employ them”—and, in ers; I swoon over teachers. Even and American higher education. addition, all rights granted to inhabit- what I learned on my own I owed What makes shared governance so ants of this country, especially those to them, because they guided me in important? There are many possible associated with the First Amendment.5 my sense of what is significant. The answers, but these are among the most n Merit selection. Third, admis- only form of knowledge that can be frequently mentioned: universities are sion of students and selection and ad- adequately acquired without the extremely complex organizations in vancement of faculty is based on merit help of a teacher and without the which centralized decision-making measured by recognized and accepted humility of a student is information, does not achieve the best results; in institutional standards. Some form of which is the lowest form of knowl- universities the proportion of self-moti- prior achievement would define merit: edge. (And in these nightmarishly vated people is large and to capture the assuredly not an issue devoid of nu- data-glutted days, the winnowing full measure of their “creative juices” merous ambiguities. One cannot ignore of information may also require requires a sense of ownership. Susan legacies, affirmative action, athletic the masterly hand of someone who Hockfield, former president of MIT, scholarships, and similar deviations knows more and better.) puts it very well: “Faculty travel the from the simplest notions of merit for One might quarrel with some spe- frontiers of their disciplines and, from students, such as scores on a standard- cific phrases, but it is not easy to imag- that vantage point, can best determine ized national test. Similarly, gender, ine these sentiments being addressed future directions of their fields and de- race, and old-boy networks can create to a screen. Few would deny the great sign curricula that bring students to the other deviations from a straightforward value of digitization, virtual course ma- frontier. No academic leader can chart standard for selecting and promoting terials, or occasionally flipped class- the course of the university’s discipline faculty. Nevertheless, objective mea- rooms but they remain complementary independent of the faculty.” sures of merit remain at the very least rather than primary. These reasons apply in general to the first approximation. n Preservation of culture. Fifth, all organizations in which profession-based n Significant human contact. these universities consider preservation authority is important, a good example Fourth, a major component of education and transmission of culture to be one being law firms and large consulting is now and is intended to remain sig- of their missions. This would include firms. Shared governance may frustrate nificant human contact: real as opposed representation of the humanities in cur- administrators intent on implement­ to virtual encounters between students riculum (mandatory for undergradu- ing rapid change, but a slower pace and teachers to encourage participation ate liberal arts), as well as, for some, may also lead to wiser choices and cer- and critical thinking. In his 2012 Tanner more specialized activities including tainly has not—in light of university his- Lectures, William Bowen calls this research and language studies, and the tories—prevented fundamental changes. “minds rubbing against minds.” The maintenance of libraries and museums. (It should be added that the current use proportions may change over time but Preservation of culture applies as much of adjuncts, offering over 50 percent the basic principle has to be retained: to MIT, Caltech, and Purdue as it does of instruction in many universities, it has to be part of liberal education for to the more traditional Yale and the has surely undermined the integrity of undergraduates who need guidance and University of Wisconsin. Indeed, many shared governance. A corps of instruc- contact in making choices, and it is a “polytechnics”—certainly including tors in which half are employed on a self-evident part of the mentor-mentee the ones mentioned here—have been yearly basis and without rights or sense relation for those aspiring to reach a the source of major innovative schol- of ownership will not be doing much Ph.D. Leon Wieseltier, in language that arship in the humanities and social creative thinking about the future.) is both valid and vivid, captured the sciences. The history of science and n Academic freedom. Second, spirit of this characteristic extremely economics are excellent examples. It despite periodic challenges, American well in a recent New Republic essay:6 is a simple fact that our most promi- research universities enjoy academic W hen I look back at my educa- nent universities specializing in science freedom—“the right of scholars to pur- tion, I am struck not by how much have programs and/or departments that sue their research, to teach, and to pub- I learned but by how much I was transcend traditional definitions of sci- lish without control or restraint from the taught. I am the progeny of teach- ence. But why? Because they believe 5 The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th edition, 2001. 6 December 31, 2012 Wi n t e r 2 0 1 4 — c a r n e g i e r e p o r t e r 61  that this both improves the education Both perspectives are wrong. The Internal and external critics have of their students and the research of the characteristics of quality are almost suggested various other cost-cutting faculty. Interdisciplinary approaches in never considered as a system even measures. For example, raising teach- all fields have been gaining favor for though the absence of any one of them ing loads or a rising student-faculty ra- many years and that may be the most will affect the integrity and quality of tio—I do not necessarily suggest either powerful driver of all. a research university. Faculty wishing one—would lower cost. A three-year n Nonprofit status. Sixth—and fi- responsibly to exercise rights of shared bachelor’s degree would have the same nally—all research universities operate governance should have the whole result. More machines, fewer humans, on a not-for-profit basis. If maximizing group clearly in mind. and an increase in online learning profit or increasing shareholder value Turning to the non-academic per- (MOOCS) may also decrease expenses. were the goal, all the previous condi- spective, none of these characteristics, Again, these may be good ideas or tions become unwelcome obstacles and singly or as a group, make—to use the not— but respecting the six character- inefficiencies that could not be toler- term beloved by our critics—disruptive istics does not prevent their implemen- ated by a competent management. But change impossible. This is an important tation (so long as shared governance is this condition is not as cut and dried as point because, I think, it runs counter to clearly understood not to be participa- it may seem. Decisions in not-for-profit widely held beliefs. tory democracy). universities can be influenced and pos- For example, tenure is perceived to Shared governance does, from time sibly distorted by considerations of be an obstacle to change. It may indeed to time, increase the burden of admin- revenue. For example, activities that be desirable instead to adopt a system istrators. Bowen, in his Tanner Lecture, generate research or operating funds in of long-term contracts—particularly asks if shared governance is suitable return for certain privileges obtained by because federal law prohibits manda- for a digital world in which decisions a funder may require exclusive access tory retirements. Faculties are aging about educational policy can frequently to specific scientific results for a limited and so are their ideas, in turn raising go beyond individual professors or de- period of time. In this sense, no research costs and keeping out the young. But partments and need to include a great university today is purely not-for-profit. it is not the enumerated characteristics mix of constituencies. As he suggests, None, however, is mainly directed by that stand in the way of change. To take individual or groups of faculty should the business aims of outside supporters. the most relevant, in the American tradi- not have veto power over change. Have The six characteristics are neither tion, employment contracts have never they ever in a well-administered institu- canonical nor subject to rigorous math- been within the purview of shared gov- tion? Bowen is right: the definition or ematical proof. They are based on my ernance. Faculties don’t determine their concept of shared governance may have (I believe uncontroversial) reading of own pay or conditions of employment; to change with the times, while the prin- our historical experience. these are in the hands of the administra- ciple of faculty voice and participation tion—even when union negotiations are is vigilantly maintained. The important III. Understanding and involved. A main barrier to change has to words are sharing combined with good Misunderstanding the Quality be the fact that—noted by Bowen in his leadership. The notion that research Requirements second Tanner Lecture—that competi- universities are “unchanging” has al- Many academics will consider a tion between non-profit peer institutions ways struck me as bizarre. Our products listing of these characteristics indi- currently drives up cost. No ambitious are education and research, and the vital vidually familiar, obvious, and of little and quality-centered research univer- element is not the format or setting (the interest. Non-academics, on the other sity can afford, on its own, to abandon bottle) but the content (the wine.) And hand, may have a quite different reac- tenure and move (say) to long-term con- that is forever changing.7 tion. The list could easily be interpreted tracts. Only an understanding with peers Conditions that are at the core of as a plea for the status quo, typical of would make it possible and that is ille- what it means to be a university are, the academic establishment that stub- gal. Bowen wonders if some collusion for many people, counterintuitive, es- bornly resists all change. would now be in the public interest. pecially for those with a background 7 A brief digression. In The Great American University, previously mentioned, Jonathan Cole suggests a list of thirteen items under the title “What Makes Great Research Universities,” p. 109. There is very little overlap with our list—the main common point being academic freedom—because what I call “characteristics of quality” all pertain to internal governance and, subject to constraints, are controlled by the university and ultimately by the trustees. And that becomes very consequential when trustees and their responsibilities are considered. 62 c a r n e g i e r e p o r t e r — Wi n t e r 2014 primarily in business. This was viv- do I want to be today—and tomor- tions: do those who constitute the idly illustrated by the recent events at row? To discover not only the ways court of last resort understand the un- the University of Virginia where a few in which human civilization plans usual entity with which they have been board members, mainly from the pri- to get somewhere, but to ask the entrusted? When trustee initiative is vate sector, believing that the new pres- question, Where does it—and where necessary and appropriate and when ident was making changes too slowly, should it—hope to go?8 it is not? Do we do enough to prepare engineered her abrupt dismissal after Those are not questions likely to trustees for their responsibilities? Are three years on the job. It seems to me arise in many corporate boardrooms those who make the appointments that this kind of coup would not be con- but they should be raised regularly more concerned about the candidate’s sidered good practice even for a private among university trustees. ability to read balance sheets than their corporation, but for an institution in which shared governance was the as- IV. Addressing the Present sumed norm it proved to be disastrous. Moment The UVA board may have acted within We come now to some of the real dif- Universities are its legal authority, but the total absence ficulties of the moment. To fulfill their of consultation created a faculty-stu- role in society—creating knowledge and a set of institutions dent revolt that forced a reversal of the educating graduate and undergraduate original action. All emerged worse off. students— the university community unlike any others Shared governance is perhaps the makes assumptions that may not always classic source of “misunderstandings,” be, and almost certainly are not now, ob- in our society. but it is not by any means the only one. vious either to the trustees who are their Academic freedom is a perpetual sore governors or to the wider public. For Our task is point, especially when it comes to the example, the characteristics associated expression of political opinion by fac- with quality can be seen as pleas for spe- to illuminate the ulty. To take one more example, preser- vation of culture may be seen by those cial privileges. In business or in govern- ment neither the freedom of expression past and shape exercising sound business judgment as an entirely discretionary luxury when it nor a voice in governance is the prac- tice. Decisions are largely profit-based the future. is, in reality, an integral part of research or necessarily political. universities. Another reality to consider is that appreciation of university values? Or Harvard President Drew Faust American universities only rarely have do we look primarily at the capacity of framed the issues eloquently in a recent written constitutions or long-lasting tra- potential trustees to make large dona- address at Boston College: ditions of common law. The guarantors tions? Or are those who have the power Universities are a set of institutions of their privileges and practices are trust- of appointment primarily interested in unlike any others in our society. ees, most of whose life experiences have a candidate’s political affiliation? The Certainly our budgets must balance, been in private business, admittedly same point can be made about faculty. our operations must be efficient, but a category possibly so broad as to be We take great care to examine research we are not about the bottom line, not largely meaningless. (Currently, around credentials and—these days, and that just about the next quarter, not even 50% of trustees come from “business,” is a major and welcome change—we about who our graduates are the 22% from professional service, and 13% look more closely at teaching capaci- day they leave our walls. Our task is from education.) Furthermore, in the ties. But do we do anything to prepare to illuminate the past and shape the case of state universities appointment to faculty to participate productively in future, to define human aspirations positions of governance can be political, shared governance? Both of these tasks for the long term. How can we look frequently in the hands of governors, will grow in urgency as the American past the immediate and the useful… and sometimes subject to state elections. research university—“the envy of the to address the larger conundrum At a time of contentiousness and world”?—navigates very stormy seas of: How shall we best live? What criticism current practices raise ques- predicted by nearly all observers. ■ 8 “Scholarship and the Role of the University: Remarks at the Boston College Sesquicentennial,” October 12, 2012. Wi n t e r 2 0 1 4 — c a r n e g i e r e p o r t e r 63