University of Virginia Library

The Screening Process

As specific names were provided the Special Committee, biographical data was assembled and transmitted to both the Faculty Senate Committee and the Student Committee for classification in terms of the qualifications of the nominees. The total number of names that came to the attention of the Special Committee was 159 and consisted of persons from all over the United States. A number of teachers now on the University faculty were included on the list along with other individuals of the widest diversity in professional and occupational backgrounds.

The Third Meeting of the Special Committee was held on 1 June 1973 and was devoted for the most part to a preliminary examination of the biographical data of the individuals whose names had been submitted. At this meeting agreement was reached that all the biographical data would be examined by each member of the Special Committee in order to be better prepared for discussion of the screening reports of the Faculty Senate Committee and the Student Committee at the next meeting of the Special Committee.

The Fourth Meeting of the Special Committee was held on 12 June 1973. At this meeting, and after an extensive examination of those individuals who had been placed on the preferred list by the Faculty Senate Committee and the Student Committee, the Special Committee tentatively reduced the number of persons on the preferred list to ten. Also, the Student Committee, which had included fourteen names on its list in comparison with the twenty names submitted by the Faculty Senate Committee, was asked to expand the number of names above the original fourteen. Six additional names, though not without reservations, were submitted by two members of the Student Committee on 18 June 1973.

The expanded list of names occupied the attention of the Special Committee at its Fifth Meeting on 18 July 1973. The list was examined in depth and was reduced to six individuals who resided in different parts of the country. After discussion, it was decided that preliminary interviews of these six individuals would be conducted by teams consisting of two members of the Special Committee. Four of the six individuals were accorded such an interview. A fifth person was interviewed in Washington, D. C. The sixth person declined an interview because of his wish to retire from a current academic administrative assignment to return to full-time teaching and research. One person from out of state came to Charlottesville for a view of the University and the community. Of the five individuals given a preliminary interview, three were invited to attend the next meeting of the Special Committee.

These three individuals appeared separately before the Special Committee at its Sixth Meeting on 14 August 1973. An entire day was devoted to these three interviews. At the conclusion of the interviews, the Special Committee agreed to propose a nominee at its next meeting.

The Seventh Meeting of the Special Committee was held on 5 September 1973. Early in this meeting it was decided to reduce the number of persons under consideration to two. The merits of these two individuals were again considered after which a poll of the Special Committee was conducted by secret ballot. The result was a unanimous vote to propose to the Board of Visitors the nominee we shall shortly present and to ask that the Special Committee, having completed its labors, be discharged.

Our decision has by no means been an easy one; members of the Special Committee have spoken on a number of occasions during our deliberations of the special kind of agony involved in making its selection. Nevertheless, guided most helpfully by the reports of the Faculty Senate Committee and the Student Committee and by views expressed to us by members of the University community, we now come to the Board of Visitors with the nominee whom we hope will be elected as the fifth President of the University in a lineage of office previously and presently graced by Presidents Edwin A. Alderman, John Lloyd Newcomb, Colgate W. Darden, Jr., and Edgar F. Shannon, Jr.