Guns for higher

In a capitalist age where the size of the wallet can trump the amount of knowledge in the brain, universities are unable to escape a continued need for revenue and funding in order to compete in the academic market. To this end, several universities across the nation have spent hours devising schemes and plans to increase the amount of money flowing into their campuses. As these schemes have developed, so too have the roles of several campus figures who must realign their concentration to foster the monetary needs of the university. Consider today’s unfortunate model of the university president.\nIncreasingly, the selection of university presidents concentrates more heavily on talent for raising funds than commitment to higher education and student livelihood. Take, for example, Purdue President Martin C. Jischke, who after holding the presidency from only 2000 to 2007 is stepping down. It was widely rumored that Jischke’s appointment was primarily the result of his ability to raise funds, which he did using a number of techniques, including increasing both tuition and student fees. Leaving the presidency vacant, Jischke will become Chairman of the Board at Wabash National, the Lafayette-based company that is one ofAmerica’s foremost manufacturers of semi-trailers. Examining Jischke’s tenure, he appears to more closely resemble a gun for hire in the world of increased revenue than a president committed to higher education. \nAdding to this image of the current-day university president is the search for the next person to hold the position at the University of Iowa. The university recently narrowed its search to two candidates: Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Chancellor Charles R. Bantz and Purdue University Provost Sally Mason (both served in some capacity under Jischke). As one of the top qualifications listed for obtaining the presidency, the university lists resource development and discusses in its description of higher education the need for economic development.\nAre the days of long-serving and obviously committed presidents those of the past, forgotten by a fast-moving, money-loving society? There is no doubt funding is required in order to provide the students at institutions with the greatest possible resources for success. However, in today’s climate, where university presidents so easily come and go, the developing danger that students will be forgotten in the fundraising focus is prominent. \nTherefore, as IU prepares for the July transition to the presidency of Michael McRobbie, we can only hope that his continual claim concerning commitment to students is true. While it appears that one of the primary reasons for choosing McRobbie is his ability to develop the University as a research institution, perhaps his familiarity with the IU family, of which he has been a member since 1997, will help him remain committed to the school and not just its budget. With any luck, higher education and love of students has not been murdered by a world more concerned with money than people.