Leadership at Ivies

I know in the grand scheme of things I am a nobody in higher education. Working for a for-profit institution is probably career suicide and if my current employment doesn’t work out I’ll have to get a job at Verizon. With that said, I am always looking to learn from the experts and the leaders in my field so I looked over The Chronicle of Higher Education’s snapshot of The Look of Leadership at the Ivy League, part of their Diversity in Academe series.

The Chronicle asked leaders at Ivy League institutions to report their “gender, age, and race and ethnicity” and received a one-third response rate; because of the low response rate they excluded “age and race and ethnicity.” When I looked at all the pictures of Ivy leadership I came to the following conclusion: most are white; most seem to be male; most are old(ish).

The more I thought about all the pictures and the low response rate I came up with two questions: 1) what is the point of running this article; and 2) does The Chronicle want to start a conversation about race, gender, and age by posting pictures of people?

There are many different facets of diversity and the big two are always race and gender. Unfortunately when you focus on these two aspects of an individual you ignore what also makes each person unique. If you ask the president of Brown if being female is the most important part of her professional life she will probably say no. If you ask the Vice President for Planning and Budget at Cornell if being black is the most important part of her professional life she will probably say no. If you ask the dean of the graduate school of the College of Arts and Sciences at Harvard if being Chinese is the most important part of his professional life he will probably say no.

With this said, I understand that your physical being is important and people will perceive and assume things about you because of your race and gender. But again I must ask; what is the point of running this article?

The Chronicle stated that only a third of leaders responded, 254 people, so a rough estimate of all the leaders at the Ivies would be around 800 (lowballing). If the Ivies mirrored the US population then the following would be true in relation to ‘gender’: 51% would be female, or 408; 49% would be male, or 392. In relation to ‘race’: 62% would be ‘white,’ or 496; 18% would be ‘hispanic,’ or 144; 13% would be ‘black,’ or 104; 5% would be ‘asian,’ or 40; 2% would be ‘multiracial’ or ‘other,’ or 16.

Does this pictorial representation of leadership at the Ivy’s mirror the US population? Should leadership at the Ivy’s mirror the US population or do Ivy’s deviate from demographic norms in the United States because of their global reach? What should leadership at the Ivy’s look like?

Think Again?

Recently I read the article, Think Again by William Deresiewicz and I am confused. I really like Mr. Deresiewicz’s writing; his articles, Solitude and Leadership and The Disadvantages of an Elite Education are brilliant. His ideas are coherent, his career admirable, and his use of words inspiring. This is why I am confused; in 533 words he praises Portland for its beautification projects and insults New York. In his next breath he backhands Portland for being poorly educated while praises New York down to the airport workers for being ‘on the ball’ intellectually.

The first part of the article that made me think again was, “Portland, to be blunt about it, is not exactly bursting at the seams with intellect. As another transplant recently remarked, the people are too provincial, too poorly educated, and too apt to take personally arguments about ideas.”

Too provincial. I find this funny because I joke that I live in the provinces; Arizona, according to many outside the state, is not known for its intellectual thought or progressive ideas (I use the term progressive here non-politically; forward thinking). With my self-deprecation out of the way I get tired of the major media outlets discounting 70% of the country and focusing on the coasts. I understand that the northeast, Los Angeles, and the San Francisco megaregions contain 30% of the US population and are the political, technological, and media centers of the country but there is plenty of culture and brilliant people to be found else, even in the provinces.

Too poorly educated; I don’t know where to start. New York is an old city for the United States and has been one of the global centers of capitalism for a long time. With age and wealth comes philanthropy and investment into higher education; the number of well-renown undergraduate and graduate institutions is too long to list. Portland on the other other hand is a moderately sized western city with enough higher education institutions to meet the needs of the population with the two major state institutions located a few hours south.

Continuing with the too poorly educated, in Portland, between the ages of 25 and 34, 46.7% have a bachelors degree or higher while 50.4% have a bachelors of higher between the ages of 35 to 44. In New York, between the ages 25 and 34, 46% have a bachelors degree or higher while 37.6% have a bachelors degree or higher between the ages of 34 to 44. What do these numbers tell us? On average Portland is more educated than New York. The difference is, of course, is that New York is 13 times larger than Portland and New York attracts students from all around the world to attend its numerous highly acclaimed institutions.

The other quote that made me think again was, “It’s remarkable how pleasant things can be when people put aside their selfishness and think about the common good. You don’t have to be a genius. You just have to not be a dick.”

Few problems in this world truly require geniuses;simple logic, friendly cooperation, and strong leadership usually save the day. Maybe the point of the article is that we all have to take a moment and just think and act for the common good. New York, with its might, money, and splendor can’t seem to get it right when it comes to urban beautification while Portland, which to many does not have might, money, or splendor has gotten it right.

As Mr. Deresiewicz said, maybe the key is that you have to “act for the common good” and “not be a dick.” I am guessing that not all people in Portland act for the common good and there are dicks everywhere, but if you live in Portland as an adult it is a lifestyle choice. And when it comes to education this might be another choice; maybe people in Portland feel like they do not have to be the smartest dick in the room while in New York even the airport workers have to prove themselves to strangers.