OPINION & EDITORIAL
Farrell for provost
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- A security fee-for-all (December 11, 2007)
- Farewell, Chancellor (December 10, 2007)
- $$FC (December 6, 2007)
- In a bind (December 5, 2007)
- Entitlement Town (December 4, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Who's afraid of Virginia Sapiro? (January 23, 2006)
- Sapiro for provost (January 15, 2006)
- Scandals and job openings (December 14, 2005)
- Farrell off to promising start (April 6, 2006)
- The dawn of a new era (March 9, 2006)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Monday, March 6, 2006
Less than two months ago, this Board endorsed Virginia Sapiro for the position of University of Wisconsin provost. It was then, and is now, our firm belief that Ms. Sapiro is the most sensible candidate for the high office.
However, Chancellor John Wiley, citing a fundamental support for the shared governance process, has indicated to this Board that he will respect the list offered to him by the search and screen committee and choose between UW Dean Patrick Farrell and Georgia Institute of Technology Dean Sue Rosser. It is regrettable that a largely incompetent search and screen committee has managed to tie the chancellor's hands as such, but this is the reality we face today.
Understanding the field to be limited to these two candidates, we endorse Mr. Farrell.
A competent dean known for his intellect and generally respected by his peers, Mr. Farrell will ably occupy the second highest office at UW with a brand of dignity and professionalism this school deserves. He has both a bachelor's and doctoral degree from the University of Michigan, a master's from the University of California—Berkeley and a solid administrative record that includes his current work within UW's School of Engineering.
Mr. Farrell stands in stark contrast to the attributes of Ms. Rosser, a fringe feminist whose ideology could further embattle Bascom Hall's already-sullied reputation.
The Georgia Tech administrator has openly advocated for single-sex classrooms in higher education — a notion perhaps best relegated to the early 20th century — and sought to further various other gender-based policies that universally treat the sexes as fundamentally different within an education context. She seeks to draw vast contrasts between men and women seeking a higher education, and in the year 2006 such is a dichotomy that any civilized university ought to reject.
Indeed, in stating the qualifications of Mr. Farrell for this weighty job, it must be recognized that one of the many reasons he ought to receive this promotion is simply because he is not Ms. Rosser.
To be sure, this is not a contest between two suitable individuals — Mr. Farrell is as qualified as Ms. Rosser is troubling. And given the extraordinary nature of those qualities, Mr. Wiley's forthcoming decision ought to be a relatively simple one.
Anonymous (March 6, 2006 @ 8:53am):
One of Ms. Rosser's main goals is to increase the number of women in primarily-male fields (such as engineering). Furthermore she spearheaded a Women's Studies program at her prior place of employment. If anything, these make her more qualified for the job. Ms. Rosser would bring a much needed change to this university--rather than maintain an ineffective, stagnant position.
Anonymous (March 6, 2006 @ 9:55am):
Isn't hating on "fringe feminists" itself something that should be relegated to the early 20th century? Lady's got views? I'm down with that, even if I disagree. Will she be a competent and humane administrator? That's what matters to me. But apparently not you.
Anonymous (March 6, 2006 @ 1:41pm):
I recommend the editors actually read some of Dean Rosser's research on women in higher education before assuming her views are either outdated or overly progressive (though how they can be both is a mystery to me).
Anonymous (March 6, 2006 @ 4:10pm):
How do you increase the number of females in engineering? It's not like they don't know engineers can get better jobs, or that they utilize a lot of different skills. Do you con them into it or pay them off or something?
