(Re)view from the top

By the beginning of March, the review of President Richard Brodhead’s second term will be completed. But more than seven years after he assumed the presidency, his vision for the University still lacks a demonstrated focus.

A presidential review committee, comprised of members of the Board of Trustees and faculty, will assess Brodhead’s second term thus far and present a summary to the Board in May. The committee’s report is one factor in deciding whether or not he receives a reappointment to Duke’s presidency.

The review committee should focus on two perennial criticisms of Brodhead: that he fails to connect with the Duke community and that he sometimes fails to elucidate a coherent vision for Duke’s future.

As president of Duke University, Brodhead’s role is twofold. He is expected to represent both the interests of the students, and serve as a figurehead of the University in a broader context. In both spheres, Brodhead has left something to be desired.

As a voice for the students, Brodhead suffers because of his difficulty in connecting with students on a personal level. In small group settings, Brodhead thrives—he is witty and engaging, drawing laughs and intellectual contemplation from students. Yet, on a day-to-day basis, Brodhead is largely absent from student life and activities. He is an enigmatic figure, not often seen on the Main Quad or in the Bryan Center.

On occasion, the student body is the recipient of a sweeping email from Brodhead, in which he makes broad suggestions. But rather than offering a clear vision for the University, these emails serve only as a reminder of his presence. Such emails cannot mediate an overall lack of connection to the student body. Overall, Brodhead acts in a reactionary fashion, rather than a proactive one. To be able to speak for the students, Brodhead must first excel in speaking with the students. As a figurehead of the University, Brodhead is expected to articulate the motives of Duke’s policy decisions. But many of these have lacked in transparency, cohesive direction and timely communication to those outside of his inner circle of Trustees and top-ranking administrators.

During Brodhead’s tenure, there has been an emphasis on globalizing Duke, as evidenced most notably by DukeEngage and Duke’s new campus in Kunshan, China. DukeEngage has been mostly heralded as a successful example of Brodhead’s “knowledge in service to society” mantra. But the unfolding of events surrounding the creation of Duke Kunshan University has been troubling to the Duke community. Faculty members have spoken up about their exclusion from the process, and students have expressed concern about issues ranging from China’s lack of democracy to the value of the degrees to be awarded there.

When Brodhead speaks to an audience, he captivates the room with his prose and academic prowess. It is easy to become mesmerized by his words, yet when the words cease and he steps away from the podium, it is difficult to find the substance that Duke students crave. He has yet to adequately explain the motives that underlie Duke’s direction—in University finances, in international expansion and in campus culture—and, in some cases, the direction itself.