Changing of the guard

Laurie Patton, dean of the Trinity College of Arts and Sciences, recently accepted the position of president at Middlebury College. Today we consider Patton’s legacy at Duke and what her departure means for the University moving forward.

Patton will be sorely missed as she leaves an indelible mark on Duke. In her three years as the dean of Trinity, Patton was instrumental in devising some of Duke’s University Courses and developing the touted Bass Connections program. She will also be remembered for her role in continuing and shaping Duke’s emphasis on interdisciplinarity. She leaves Duke to become the first female president of Middlebury College in its 214-year history. The Board wishes Patton well as she embarks on her journey north to lead with her passion and innovation at Middlebury.

Patton’s departure brings the subject of administrative turnover to the center of attention. Last year, Duke bid farewell to Provost Peter Lange and Donna Lisker, associate vice provost for undergraduate education. Connie Simmons, associate dean for undergraduate affairs, also announced Tuesday that she will be leaving Duke after this academic year along with Patton. There has also been talk that other key members of the administration will be leaving the University in the near future. With such administrative flux, Duke’s leadership will see significant change in the coming years.

Amid this ongoing change of the administrative guard, Duke stands at a fork in the road where it will decide which path to take. It is a question about the formation of the University’s identity—the “Duke brand”—which has heretofore remained largely undefined. Unlike Stanford with its focus on Silicon Valley, MIT with its niche in technology and the University of Chicago with its emphasis on academia and producing students for graduate schools, Duke lacks a distinct identity. The unofficial “Ivy League of the South,” Duke is the jack-of-all-trades, casting a wide net to compete in all aspects of the modern university. Externally, it is perceived as a predominately upper class, white institution where sports and greek life reign paramount and where academics remain rigorous. While this external reputation may be misaligned with Duke’s internal identity, the question of what the “Duke brand” means to those both within and without the Duke community stands.

In an attempt to enter the coveted pantheon of the nation’s top universities, Duke has cast its net wide with programs like Duke Engage, Duke Immerse and Bass Connections. Given that the University is still in its adolescence—and that it was only recently that it moved from a regional to a national school of repute—such institutional experimentation is understandable and necessary. But, significant changes within the administration pose an opportunity to assess the University’s myriad programs and focus resources to bolster key initiatives. One example may be focusing on developing Duke’s identity as a global innovator and incorporating this identity more intentionally in the curriculum. In this model, global initiatives like Duke Engage and study abroad could have follow-up programs that help students integrate their experiences into their education. It will be the role of the changing leadership to shape Duke’s identity and its reputation in the years to come, but in this process we urge a focus on depth, rather than breadth.