University President Dave Frohnmayer has an impressive resume.
After graduating magna cum laude from Harvard College in 1962, he went on to Oxford University, and in 1967 received his law degree from the University of California at Berkeley. In 1981 he was sworn into office as Oregon’s Attorney General.
He has represented Oregon before the United States Supreme Court, personally arguing seven cases, and coming away with the best record of any current State Attorney General. In 1992 he assumed the duties of dean of the University of Oregon School of Law. In July 1994 Frohnmayer was appointed president of the University.
He recently shared with the Emerald answers to a variety of questions regarding the future of the University.
Q: What is your personal goal for this year?
A: There are three of them really: to re-emphasize academically and re-articulate the academic mission of the University in light of modern needs; to work with the Legislature to secure adequate funding, which also means working on several ballot measures; and to lay the ground work for future fundraising for the University.
Q: What role should the University play in the personal growth of its students?
A: One hopes that it is a life transforming role. We can’t be paternalistic or maternalistic, but this is a place where one hopes that there is social and personal growth, as well as intellectual growth. It’s an arena for great growth and exploration, for developing curiosity as well as the development of friendships, and skills for dealing collaboratively with other people from a wide variety of backgrounds. It should be a vital community.
Q: What is your opinion of student activists these days on this campus and other campuses?
A: Activism is welcome to the extent that it is directed thoughtfully to causes that need attention. I would certainly rather see that than people passively accepting everything they see. Some activism I have disagreed with, others, it’s not been the ends, it’s been the means. Civil disobedience is usually a last resort and usually not very persuasive.
Q: What role do you think technology will play in the future of this University and higher education in general?
A: It has already changed in a very dramatic, revolutionary way. The notion that 10 years ago you would have told me I would be sitting here responding electronically to 65-70 messages a day — when I can’t even type except with two fingers — I would have said, ‘Hey I don’t know what you are talking about.’ But in fact we do our business increasingly through technology. It has its dark side as well as its upside, in relation to misinformation that can spread, but there is no doubt that it does make us a global community. It is very cutting edge when looked at it in the way of instructional techniques — things that could never have been done any other way.
Our history faculty has actually pioneered engineering a type of atlas where you can see how the Roman Empire built its roads. Technology opens the way to traditional styles of learning as well as new styles of learning. We were at one point the nation’s leader — it is a tremendously expensive investment — but we are still among the nation’s most wired universities. We are moving pretty fast.
Q: Where does the University faculty stand in relation to other peer Universities?
A: We are in the top 60 of America’s research universities by evaluation as our status as an AAU University; notwithstanding, our faculty salaries are nowhere near where they should be. They are scandalously low, but we are still a choice destination for a great number of very talented people.
Q: How do you see the current climate around fund raising?
A: We had a record-breaking year for fundraising last year. Target for this coming year is equally ambitious, so my hope is that it will continue. With this recent controversy (the Worker Rights Consortium and Phil Knight’s consequent withdrawal of a $30 million contribution) it has been very worrisome on the part of some donors, but our hope is that those issues can be resolved.
Q: How do you respond to complaints that universities are being bought off by wealthy donors?
A: In the case of this University, it is not true. We welcome our donors [and] they don’t try to interfere with the internal affairs of the University. We have a process for screening gifts that come to us — you can actually object to a donation that is made. All of the conditions of any gift are scrutinized by the University of Oregon Foundation.
Q: Your personal life has seen emotional trauma throughout the years. What keeps you going?
A: Sheer determination to do things that are worth doing.
Q: Do you ever find it hard to come into the office each day?
A: No, I don’t [find it hard], I love it. I think it is a calling … as long as you think you can make a difference, it puts a spring in your step.