oflovefaithhopedream

Two letters from students are circulating on campus this morning. Here they are.

My email inbox has been filled today with notes from upset colleagues who seem to feel I've misjudged Rebecca Blank's capacity for leading UW-Madison.  They don't understand, I'm told, how I can overlook her clear talents, deep commitments to social justice, and great scholarship. I don't think I am.  I don't doubt any of those things.  This isn't about whether I like her or think she  can  do the job. The question is for which candidate -- Michael Schill or Rebecca Blank-- do we have the best evidence of success  at UW-Madison . I'd like to lay out more data for your consideration.  These are the types of things that led to my assessment, and so I encourage you to look for yourself, and then provide your input by tonight! (The committee will vote in the morning). Write to:  Chancellor-search@secfac.wisc.edu The Badger Herald posed direct questions to the candidates. Here is how they responded. How would you balance UW’s status as ...

As a social scientist engaged in poverty research, I wanted very much to like and welcome Rebecca Blank to campus. When the list was announced, I immediately expressed positive feelings-- she was well-liked the last time she came to campus. Her colleagues and friends adore her, and came out in droves to meet with her today. People whom I respect immensely, including Bobbi Wolfe, Bob Haveman, Chris Taber, Karl Scholz and Tim Smeeding, are very supportive of her. Should she come, she'd join them as economists and colleagues at the Institute for Research on Poverty, and undoubtedly help to grow that part of the university. Unfortunately, given that my first priority is not my corner of campus but rather helping to ensure that Wisconsin's great public flagship university is led by someone who wants it to serve all  of the people of Wisconsin, I cannot support the candidacy of this undoubtedly outstanding researcher and public servant.  I gave her the same litmus test I used with M...

I am not a nervous person, but I was sweating a bit as I waited more than an hour in line today to meet Michael Schill, candidate for chancellor of UW-Madison.  Next year will be my 10th at this university, and I have come to love it deeply, and feel strongly about the important role the chancellor plays in the direction it takes.  And thus, it was with some trepidation that I shook hands with Michael, because my instinct is that he's an excellent pick for Chancellor , and thus an important person in our future. As readers know, I profiled two other chancellor candidates shortly after they were announced and declined to endorse them.  It didn't take long to figure out they weren't a match.  I haven't yet weighed in on Rebecca Blank, and feel I can't do so until I meet her next week-- she made several comments during her last visit that make me hesitate, and I want to see what she thinks after her Washington experiences. But reading Schill's work and talking with...

There's hardly ever been a more difficult and auspicious time to lead a public flagship university. Yet at the same time, I believe it's among the greatest opportunities, and anyone would be beyond lucky to have the job. The last chancellor of UW-Madison nearly undid our relationship with our state. In my opinion, then and now, she was nothing short of disastrous.  And, we have learned since her departure that her employment could have been avoided if only the search had involved a genuine due diligence process before she was brought in for interviews. For example, had due diligence occurred, we would have known-- before she came to woo the campus with her charisma-- that as long as Biddy's around, no one needs to have good ideas, for she has them all. In a setting like ours, where shared governance prevails, and we know that good ideas come from all sorts of places, she clearly wouldn't have fit. Due diligence is a must when hiring any leader. And it's incredibly ...