University of Virginia Library

The Reports of the Faculty and Student Committees

The reports of the two committees were submitted to the Special Committee as requested on 4 May 1973. The Faculty Report was entitled A Report from the University Faculty Senate Committee to the Special Committee of the Board of Visitors on the Nomination of a President. The Student Committee's report bore the title of A Report from the Student Committee to the Special Committee of the Board of Visitors on the Nomination of a President. While the Special Committee does not necessarily endorse all the views expressed in these reports, each of these documents in its own distinctive way was most helpful in guiding the members of the Special Committee as they set about the task of finding a person they could unanimously propose to the Board of Visitors for the position of President of the University.

The report of the Faculty Senate Committee, which is attached to this report as Appendix A, singled out certain attributes which it felt should be possessed by the person selected to be President. These were administrative ability and academic experience, "an articulate and persuasive spokesman" for the University before the public, and high personal standards. As the Faculty Senate Report said: "Above all, the President, in character, personality, and style, must project the proper image of the University of Virginia." As regards administrative ability, the report noted that the University of Virginia is a large and complex organization of which the President is the chief administrative officer and went on to say: "It is his responsibility to see that this organization runs smoothly and efficiently. He must understand the processes of academic administration and decision-making and provide such leadership that these processes are carried out successfully. He must have the ability to choose competent associates, be willing to delegate authority to them, and stand ready to accept responsibility for their decisions. His approach to administration should not be bureaucratic or authoritarian, but rather he should be able to achieve results in the context of the University's participatory decision-making custom in a manner that will not alienate his various constituents: the faculty, students, alumni, and citizens of Virginia."

In addition to administrative skills, the Faculty Senate Committee expressed the view that academic experience was a necessary qualification for the Presidency. "It would be difficult, if not impossible," the Faculty Senate Committee report continued, "for a person who was not familiar with academic institutions to administer such an institution successfully. Furthermore, the President must understand the faculty point of view and, as the senior faculty member, have the full respect and confidence of his faculty and students. ... He must have acceptable credentials in his area of intellectual endeavor, and he must have a strong commitment to high quality education. While it is not necessary that he be an internationally recognized scholar of the very highest order, he should have undergone the discipline of engaging in some significant intellectual effort." The report concluded on this point that "the selection of a new President should not be approached as a choice between an administrator or an academician. The President should be both."

Likewise of immense value to the Special Committee was the report of the Student Committee which is appended to this report as Appendix B. That committee in speaking of the Presidency labeled it as an office of "extreme importance, not only to the University, but also to the Commonwealth of Virginia. The University's position within the State" the Student Committee said, "has been and continues to be unique, and the President must reflect the University's character both in his private and public images. ... the Committee hopes that each potential candidate might be reviewed on the basis of that combination of qualities or attributes which would make him the most appropriate choice." In speaking of these qualities the Student Committee noted that "The next President will most certainly have to be responsive to both student and faculty problems. He will certainly have to be a person of stature who will command respect not only at the University but throughout the State. He must be an administrator capable of directing the University and of securing the necessary funds both from the state legislature and from private sources to further the University's ambitions in its search for excellence."

Moreover, the Student Committee held that "the most important qualification for a potential candidate should be his personality. The President of the University is a public figure and as such conveys this image of the University wherever he is present. The President should be able to command respect if not agreement among diverse constituencies. We seek a candidate who is honest, innovative and one who strives for a personal contact between himself and all sectors of the University."

As might be expected, the Student Committee gave special attention to the next President's relations with the student body. The committee summarized its view in the statement that "The President should also be firmly committed to the concept of student self-government and participation in the decision-making processes of the University. To do this he must: (1) constantly take a strong public stand in support of the Honor System and render all possible assistance to student leaders so that it will remain safe from attacks from outside the University; (2) make sure that the University committee structure provides a meaningful system for both student and faculty input in the administrative decisions of the University; and (3) actively seek input from student leaders concerning the problems which students face. In every sense of the word he should be 'concerned' with students and student input."

Concluding on this aspect, the Student Committee stated that "The next President must also strive to attain even higher levels of academic excellence at the University. He should continue to insist on the importance of out-of-state students and use his influence to preserve the national character of the University. At the same time he should recognize the responsibility of the University to the State in providing education to those from all socio-economic levels. He should firmly commit the University to the increased recruitment of minority students."

The Student Committee report also spoke of the President's primary role in the recruitment and retention of distinguished faculty, the President's duties with respect to representation before the people of Virginia, and the need for innovative skills in meeting the educational needs of the future.

At the meeting of the Board of Visitors on 1 June 1973 the Rector reported publicly on the general progress of the Special Committee and praised the faculty and student committees on their reports.