Opinion: Editorial

Pro-choices

We all like to have choices. It stands to reason that the more options we have available to us, the higher the likelihood we can find one we are truly happy with. Sure, too many choices can prove overwhelming and ultimately counterproductive, but when faced with the prospect of say, three options or five options, who among us would want to close the door on two more options?

Unfortunately, that kind of sensible reasoning seems to be lacking among the University of Wisconsin’s search and screen committees. In its infinite wisdom, the committee chaired by Afro-American studies professor Michael Thornton sifted and winnowed the applicants for vice provost for diversity and climate to only three finalists. Just this week, The Badger Herald learned that one of the candidates, Kenneth Durgans, has accepted a position at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis.

Now, the number of finalists for Provost Patrick Farrell to choose from is down to two. Perhaps Seema Kapani and Damon Williams are both wonderful candidates, but perhaps not. It has been four months, after all, since the candidates were announced and still no decision has been made. Is it so far-fetched to think Mr. Farrell could have benefited from one or two more names to consider?

This wouldn’t be so troubling to us had it not happened before. Mr. Farrell himself was the beneficiary of a short list provided to Chancellor John Wiley in December 2005. That search and screen committee narrowed an unknown quantity of candidates to — you guessed it — just three. Less than a month later, one of those candidates accepted a position at the University of Kentucky, leaving Mr. Wiley with just two choices.

The 2006-07 dean of students search also generated only three finalists. Fortunately, none of those individuals withdrew their candidacy, but it’s dispiriting to see UW’s search and screen committees have not gleaned any lessons from their predecessors. In a December 2006 Badger Herald article, Mr. Wiley said he wished he had been given more than three candidates to choose from for the position of dean of students. In that same article, Mr. Farrell told the Herald, “Traditionally, committees are told, ‘We would like to see a minimum of three (finalists), but four or five is a little better.’”

While no one can change the past, we believe this discussion could not come at a more opportune time. Mr. Wiley will step down from his post in September, and a search and screen committee will soon publicly announce a list of finalists for the highest administrative post at UW-Madison.

According to the UW website, 43 individuals applied for the position when it was last vacant in 2000. This year’s committee, chaired by social work professor Marsha Mailick Seltzer, should nominate no fewer than five finalists. Certainly, at least that many competent individuals will apply, and the committee should provide the Board of Regents with as many cogent options as possible. For Ms. Seltzer and her colleagues to proactively whittle the list and nominate only their favorite three names would be doing this university an immense disservice.

Choices are good. As a general rule, more choices mean a better outcome. It seems obvious to us, but we can only hope this particular search and screen committee agrees.