The Cavalier daily Friday, February 9, 1973 | ||
Filling Shannon's Shoes
President Shannon had hardly announced
his intention to step down as President of the
University when, as human nature would have
it, rumors began to circulate as to who his
successor would be. Not too surprisingly,
Governor Linwood Holton's name has been
mentioned, as have those of former Senator
William Spong, Law Professor A.E. Dick
Howard, Provost David Shannon, Faculty
Dean Robert Cross, and (incredibly) even
former Governor Mills Godwin. Others will
indubitably crop up, and the list will become
a Who's Who Among Virginia Politicians and
Educators.
Some of the people who will be considered
should be unacceptable to students and others
whose memories haven't failed them. Anyone
who has been around the Commonwealth
long enough to know anything about Mills
Godwin, for instance, should cringe at the
mere suggestion that he become President of
the University. The days of massive resistance,
the days of sending all the "boys" back to
their books and schoolwork, are not so buried
in Mr. Godwin's past that we have forgotten
his attitude toward the University or his
efforts to deny equal opportunity here while
he was governor. It is not too early to let the
Board of Visitors know that, should Mr.
Godwin be defeated in the gubernatorial race,
he will not be welcome to take up residence
at Cat Hill.
We are not, in fact, elated at the number
of political personalities whose names are
being bandied about as potential replacements
for Mr. Shannon. Indeed, the remarkable
progress made at the University in the past 14
years has been under the leadership of a man
chosen from a relatively obscure academic
post. Surely there are educators as capable
and as qualified to lead the University as Mr.
Shannon, and we would be surprised if it were
necessary to select a rundown politician as his
successor.
There are elements of personality which
enter into a university president's rapport
with his students and faculty which must not
be overlooked in choosing Mr. Shannon's
successor. His background in whatever field in
which he has excelled should not include
immature attitudes toward intellectualism,
students, or education at any point. In fact, if
present University officials are considered,
students should make their feelings known as
to how the candidate and the students will get
along.
Provost David Shannon, to cite another
example, despite his record of service to the
University as a scholar and Dean of the
College faculty, has shown a disheartening
lack of concern-bordering on arrogance-in his
dealings with students. Administrators or
faculty members who, like Provost Shannon
often act as if students are only flies in the
academic ointment should be ruled out as
potential presidents.
The procedure for selecting the new
president, while it may appear on the surface
to be perfectly reasonable, should be heavily
influenced by student opinion of the right
sort. By this we do not mean a select
committee of the chairmen and presidents of
every student organization; we mean grass
roots student participation.
This appointment is important enough to
everyone that for once the powers that be
should see to it that the Lumpenproletariat
have a voice in the choice. Too often
appointments to the most sensitive posts in
the University are left to a small clan gathered
at some mountain hideaway where suspected
deviationists are tempted to sell their souls for
a few sips of scotch.
We do not suggest that students are
bound to differ on every criteria the Board's
committee utilizes to judge the qualifications
of the candidates. In fact, no doubt many of
the qualities needed in a university president
are universally recognizable; the only disputes
arise in determining which men or women fill
them.
The point to keep in mind at this early
stage of the selection process is that students
must, throughout the next 18 months, insist
upon being represented–and not just by
yes-men. Otherwise, the appointment of a
new University president will be left to the
vicissitudes of Virginia politics... and then we
will be sorry.
The Cavalier daily Friday, February 9, 1973 | ||