This University is a lot like a student double-majoring in pre-med and theater arts: It needs to pick one direction and go with it.
But as it stands now, this school is caught in a schizophrenic nightmare, unable to decide if its foundation is made of alumni donations and infrastructure improvements or a birthplace for socially conscious activists. There is a dire need for President Frohnmayer to offer a clear vision of which avenue this institution will travel, or step aside for a new leader to do the job.
The symptoms of the schizophrenia are clear.
On the one hand, the irritating rash caused by the constant chaffing of local activists has been nagging us since the early 1960s and shows little signs of going away. If left unchecked, this problem will lead to a socially conscious group of students recognized widely for their convictions and dilapidated facilities.
On the other diseased hand, there’s the recent fundraising records set for such projects as the law school, the business school expansion and renovation and Autzen Stadium. Long term, this problem can manifest itself in a more attractive campus with better scholastic facilities and a better athletic program, but the University runs the risk of a “sell-out” reputation.
Clearly, the best course of action would be to further raise funds and improve the infrastructure of the campus. Better facilities make it easier to attract better professors, which obviously leads to a better overall academic environment. And as the quality of education grows, so too does the reputation of the school, further increasing the value of an Oregon graduate.
While some may claim an activist campus offers a good educational atmosphere by examining social issues, it is the nation’s top tier law and business and journalism schools, etc., that lead to the best education value for alumni. After all, when was the last time Wall Street or Madison Avenue listed Reed College as their primary recruiting ground?
Leaving the problem alone to fester and to balance itself out is not an acceptable option. The tension between the very vocal minority of activist students and the silent majority of students who believe there is a definite need for better facilities and donor contributions is real and will not mend itself. Until the tension is dissolved, however, no progress can be made in either direction.
And while this little bit of tension can be survivable, the University cannot achieve great standing as either a bastion of social consciousness or as a modern university with impressive facilities and impeccable educational opportunities.
It would be easy to simply suppose that this tension has been a bother for the last four decades and is just a fact of life that must be taken as cosmic truth. After all, Eugene is probably still the world’s leader in per capita hippie population, and it wouldn’t be a school year without an unseemly, boisterous demonstration in the name of some animal rights, ecological or humanitarian cause.
That position, however, is utterly and nonsensically defeatist. If this institution had a leader with a clear vision for the future, this unique limbo that is the school’s atmosphere could be transformed into a productive, harmonious university. This campus can be a good place for future leaders of the real world to grow and thrive, but that will take a strong will from the school’s administration.
Do we want money, stature and improved education, or the pride of
a socially conscious body? In the name of progress and peace, maybe it’s time to just pick the money and move on so that the University can achieve greatness sooner rather than later. Solve the schizophrenia and pick pre-med.