As Professor Sheila E. Blumstein entered the final weeks of her interim presidency, she sat down with George Street Journal reporter Janet Kerlin to talk about the success, challenges and surprises she's experienced since being named interim president on Feb. 9, 2000. Here are excerpts from their conversation.
Was this interim presidency what you would have expected?
I didn’t expect I would have enjoyed it as much as I have. I have enjoyed a sense of fullness and richness that comes with the job.
There is a great deal of time spent outside the office, meeting with faculty, graduate students, undergraduate students, introducing speakers — we have a vibrant and rich schedule of events at this institution — and of course there is a fair amount of traveling. It’s all been exciting and stimulating. I’ve really been a bit surprised how much I enjoyed it. My sense of self did not include such an extensive and intensive social life. Sometimes I’ve been over-stimulated, and I found it difficult to come down to earth.
How do you mean?
There are times when you wake up in the middle of the night with lists of things to do, ideas, or problems that need solving. Sometimes it’s so hard to settle down and say "I’m not going to do anything on Saturday." Focused reflection is the richest part of my life as an academic. It has been very hard to do that, if not impossible, as president.
What’s been the biggest job you’ve had to tackle?
There have been many jobs — all of them big. I have tried to focus on some of the University’s broad goals. The biggest challenge has been to try to identify our priorities and needs, and to develop strategies to meet them, particularly given our limited resources. We have had many discussions on how to achieve need-blind admissions and increase the number of graduate fellowships. There are always issues about library resources and a particular focus on information technology, in part because we’ve lost some of our momentum there. We have to continue to be competitive with faculty salaries. All of these priorities need to be met, but none can be resolved in six months, or even during my tenure as interim president.
What we have accomplished is beginning the conversation and developing plans to meet these priorities. The new president might choose to do it differently but I think the issues are at least well-defined and well-articulated, and potential strategies have been developed.
One of the things I think we’ve done well is faculty retention. When faculty have received offers from other institutions, we have remained competitive and most have chosen to stay at Brown. I’ve been very active in speaking to faculty about why Brown is the place to be, and why they should stay at Brown.
Some important academic initiatives are working their way through the approval process, ranging from a new Ph.D. in Modern Culture and Media to a Ph.D. in Theatre, Speech and Dance. A master’s of fine arts program in acting and directing has been created that will involve Trinity Repertory Theater — it’s very exciting and it’s all the best of Brown. It’s creative and it does it in a Brown way, by building on strengths and building partnerships. We are also in the process of changing changing the Program of Afro-American Studies to the Department of Africana Studies. We kicked off a Medical School campaign last year. The Life Sciences Building is moving forward, and construction on Carr House and the Watson Institution are continuing.
I feel that all of these are real accomplishments.
One of the things the Brown community spent a lot of time reviewing and discussing is the report from the Visiting Committee on Diversity. My office has issued a report on what we’ve accomplished to date. I think Brown can take pride in these efforts. In addition, we have been reviewing Brown's living and learning environment with the goal of improving the quality of campus life for our students.
There have been other big issues that have just hit the desk unexpectedly.
Do you mean the events surrounding the Brown Daily Herald's publication of David Horowitz's reparations ad?
Yes. Handling those events took a lot of energy and a lot of time. I think there was a tremendous amount of polarization on campus at first. What I’ve seen more recently is a lot of good, healthy conversation. In the early stages people were staking out positions and not really listening to each other's point of view.
My hope is that, as difficult and as painful as it was, we’re in a better place than we were before. Seeking common ground will require more thought, more discussions. The conversation is not over in terms of the important issues raised by the series of events surrounding the Horowitz ad.
What will happen next?
Starting in September, we will begin a freshman pilot program that will allow non-minority students to talk about issues of diversity in a focused way. This program will occur parallel to Third World Transition Program. We’ve been planning on doing the pilot program anyway, but I think the timing is perfect. We have to be more proactive rather than reactive in dealing with issues of diversity. During the next academic year, we will have a series of ongoing events that include speakers, dialogues, dinner meetings, dorm outreaches, faculty-student discussions, faculty forums. No problem is ever solved by going forward in one direction. We will also have a new leader in Ruth Simmons who’s highly connected to these issues. I think she will bring the conversation to a new level.
Would you ever want to become a university president again?
I want to be careful because every time I’ve ever said "no" I’ve ended up doing it. My initial reaction is no. It’s not a job, it’s a calling; it’s a life. You cannot, in my view, have a richly intellectual life [as a university president].
There are also tremendous personal sacrifices. It's 24/7. You’re on call, evenings are gone, many weekends are gone. You tend to lose control of the calendar and of your life more generally, and that's hard, particularly if you’re the kind of person who needs more time alone.
I’m truly looking forward to "going home" as I call it.
Being president is something I found to my surprise I was quite good at. It’s possible I will find the transition [back to faculty life] hard, but — there’s a term in acoustics called dynamic range. The job of president has a tremendous dynamic range related to other jobs that I have had at Brown. As a result, the highs are higher and the lows are lower. Nonetheless, on balance, this job has definitely had a positive balance.
The pace of the presidency is extraordinary. I’m a self-confessed workaholic. I have been my entire life, but this has been the greatest challenge: to come out of this job without burning out. I have heard the average term of a university president is five years. It is now very clear to me why.
What is it about your research that makes you want to go back to it?
It’s exciting. I want to understand the nature of human language, the process we use to speak and understand and the neural basis of such processing. Language is one of the markers of our humanity. It turns me on. What can I say? I’ve been blessed with an interest in and curiosity about something that I’ve been allowed to spend my life looking at.
What do you want your interim presidency to be remembered for?
I would like it to be remembered for its stability and depth — that there was something truly happening, that it wasn’t just a waiting period. Also, for its consistent commitment to the values this community has. For a president, the thought of a legacy is usually considered to be in terms of buildings and programs, but those aren't accomplished in a year and a half. So I think you have to say that the legacy I hope to leave is a style of leadership, of fairness, and a sense of what this institution stands for. My hope is that Brown is a better place than we were before, that we are stronger and more grounded. If my legacy is any part of this, I’d be very pleased.