IU columnists duke it out on IU's priorities

IU President Adam Herbert's recent decision to make life sciences "our highest University priority" has caused great controversy. \nReactions ranged from support to adamant opposition to indifference. Proponents believe a stronger life science's program will lead to more funding from the state, thus leading to more money overall for the University. They also believe that it will boost IU's rankings and the number of applicants who apply to the school. \nOpponents believe a focus on life sciences will lead to the weakening and possibly the demise of certain liberal arts programs, particularly the less prominent ones.\nMy opinion falls somewhere in the middle. \nIf this plan to restructure life sciences is carried out correctly, it can achieve all that its supporters hope it will achieve without destroying what its opponents fear it will destroy. \nWhen someone thinks of Purdue University, they tend to think of a nationally ranked engineering program. When they think of Juilliard, they obviously think of a nationally ranked music school. \nBut what about IU? \nIU has a nationally ranked business program; the Kelley School ranks No. 6 among public universities and No. 11 overall by US News & World Report. IU has a nationally ranked music program, consistently performing in the top three along with more specialized schools like Juilliard and the University of Rochester's Eastman School of Music. \nHow often does a school have top 10 programs in polar opposites such as music and business? \nNot often. IU is unique in that it demonstrates an ability to have nationally ranked programs across the board. In case those two examples were not enough for you, the Ernie Pyle School of Journalism is ranked in the top five (right up there with the Ivy League Columbia University.) The School of Public and Environmental Affairs is third nationally, first among publics. Both Informatics and Optometry are in the top three, and COAS ranks in the 90th percentile. If we can achieve such high rankings in such dramatically different fields, then who is to say we cannot have a strong life sciences program and a strong liberal arts program at the same time? \nOur analytical chemistry and nuclear physics programs were already ranked in the top 10 in the nation by US News & World Report 2004, right along with British literature and Latin American history, to name a few. \nAs long as the University goes about the strengthening of life sciences in a carefully planned, logical manner, it can achieve its goal without overly weakening the liberal arts. Yes, they may suffer temporarily, but the strengthening of life sciences can serve as a catalyst for broader University improvement, if conducted in a responsible, careful manner. I cannot stress the world "careful" enough. \nLook at it like you would a person at a gym: Just because they choose to focus on strengthening their arms doesn't mean their legs are going to immediately collapse from under them.