Correction appended.
Since Chancellor Thomas Tisch '76 announced the rosters of those picking President Ruth Simmons's successor last month, we have heard complaints that the humanities are underrepresented on the selection committees. The complaints are well-founded. These objections will amount to nothing, however, if students remain largely indifferent to the presidential search process and do not direct their concerns to those in power.
Brown's presidential search is led by two groups. First, there is the Presidential Selection Committee, which is chaired by Tisch and comprises members of the Corporation, the University's highest governing body. Second, there is the Campus Advisory Committee, comprising administrators, three undergraduate students selected by the Undergraduate Council of Students, a graduate student and six professors appointed by the Faculty Executive Committee.
Critics of the process note that all three student representatives are social science concentrators, no members of the Corporation are involved in humanities careers, and only one professor represents the humanities. The FEC was tasked with appointing six professors from all four academic disciplines — physical sciences, life sciences, social sciences and the humanities — as well as a medical faculty member. So, only one discipline was allotted more than one professor slot. Still, there are a lot of questions that remain unanswered. Why are none of the four students from humanities backgrounds? Why would UCS exclusively take students studying economics or commerce, organizations and entrepreneurship when Corporation members already disproportionately represent the financial industry?
These are all important questions, but it seems that students are largely disinterested in putting pressure on administrators to get answers. The presidential search committees hosted a forum designed for undergraduates to voice their opinions on what the greater student body wants in the next president, but fewer than 20 undergraduates attended.
Our institution is at a crucial moment in defining its identity. We have stepped away from the undergraduate focus that makes our University so unique and have taken large steps toward becoming more of a research university in the vein of our peer institutions. Some students agree with this statement and others do not. Yet it is certain that our next president will play an utterly integral role in determining whether this trend continues, or whether we return to our roots.
We do not expect to see as much enthusiasm for these issues as for, say, the appearance of John Krasinski '01 at Brown — though we love Jim's pranks on Dwight just as much as the next editorial page board. But it is dissonant to complain about how our university continues to refocus away from humanities and less lucrative undergraduate concerns while simultaneously ignoring forums explicitly held to allow students to voice these grievances. If we want to ensure that the administration and the Corporation reclaim our University's core values, or at least take undergraduate opinions seriously, we need to show up in droves to give them reason to do so.
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that there have been eight forums for undergraduates to voice their opinions on the presidential search. In fact, only one forum was held for undergraduate input. The Herald regrets the error.
Editorials are written by The Herald's editorial page board. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.
