Yeah, I get that. He’s not everyone’s cup of tea. But I think he’ll grow on you.
I can say one thing about him unequivocally: when Wesleyan absolutely needs to make the right decision about something, he has my full confidence. And there aren’t that many people about whom I can make that statement. Not anyone to whom I’m related. Few people with whom I worked or know. I’m a lawyer, so I instinctively assume things will go wrong and people will bungle the key moments. But Roth will always make the right choice for Wes when it really counts. In situations in which others wither from the heat, Roth tends to stand firm and doesn’t seem to become weary over it (as you can see with some other people even when they try to hide it).
He’s 100% a NYC boy, so it seems to take quite a lot to phase him, and I’ve yet to see it. But yeah, he can be a little imperious and, as I said, he’s a talker.
Would have liked to have seen him at the Congressional hearing. I am not a fanboy when I say I don’t think he screws that up as did the H, P and C presidents. The guy is almost made for those moments.
I can’t agree more. Roth has an excellent sense of where history will side on - ranging from campus frats to SATs to admissions legacy. He offered his resignation if the board wanted to keep legacy preference; Yale in contrast appointed another committee to study it.
Roth will stick his neck out to defend a position he believes would be good for Wes. Agree or disagree with any of his positions, you have got to admire this type of leadership by principle and not committee.
Because I get to see university president-ing up close, I don’t expect perfection or anything close to it. My sense is that Roth does a generally good job running Wes, even if his personality isn’t exactly for me; if that’s my perspective at commencement in four years, I’ll be very pleased!
Here I’ll disagree. I hope he is never invited (at least in the current environment), and if he is, I desperately hope he is wise enough to say no. It’s all downside. The fix is in, the house always wins, etc.
Couldn’t agree more! This past fall, my husband and I were at Hamilton watching our freshman daughter’s sport’s game. We were standing back a bit, watching the game with our dog (SUPER dog-friendly campus). President Whippman wandered up to us with his dog, introduced himself, and we chatted with him about the game, dogs, weather, etc. Upperclassmen parents later said that he makes the rounds of home games on weekends, just walking his dog and meeting families. Super down to earth. Truly impressed by this guy.
In other NESCAC news, Middlebury’s president just announced that she’s accepted the presidency at the American Academy of Arts & Sciences and will leave the college in January 2025.
She’s been there for almost 10 years, which seems pretty typical when it comes to average tenure of departing college presidents. It is a bit unusual for a college president to leave in the middle of a capital campaign, though. She’s staying in Vermont and will commute to Cambridge, and her husband will continue to teach at Middlebury.
Best compliment you can give to Roth. IMO, leaders that try to please everyone and are guided by consensus building do an good job most of the time; but when it comes to controversial decisions that really matter, the best leaders tune out the noise and simply do what they feel is right in the gut.
I work in film and there is a correlation here. The very best film comes from a director and DP that have strong views on how the story should be told and how the picture should look like. If you decide by committee, you end up with the Marvel cinematic universe - sure you make money from that but somewhere along the line, you lose a little of your artistic soul.
Hard to believe that at 16 years in office, Roth may be the “dean” of New England college presidents. He’s aged pretty well for someone now in his late sixties. I have vivid memories of one of his predecessors, the late Victor L. Butterfield, at exactly the same age and there’s no comparison. My takeaway? It pays not to be a chain smoker.
Good piece. There is an especially good focus on the subject of ED admissions, a portal through which my kiddos were admitted to their respective schools (in the interests of full disclosure). Rania, a “superb” student who spent her middle school years living in a NYC shelter with her mom and brother, and thereafter in the foster system, is one of the students profiled. She targeted Barnard for the typical reasons and also so that she could remain near her brother. Given her obvious financial aid needs, she felt that regular decision was the only route for her. She was waitlisted at Barnard (60% of the class admitted ED), and had given up hope on elite college admissions when Wesleyan came through at the 11th hour with a full ride ride +.
I have had some experience with kids who have these kinds of back stories and who, despite those challenges, manage to not only keep themselves together but also develop and maintain serious goals and ambition. They are worth the investment, because that kind grit and determination are hard to teach and manufacture in a person. Barnard’s loss; Wesleyan’s (and NESCAC’s !) gain IMO.
Also mentions that about 70% of Middlebury’s entering class last year was ED.
The piece doesn’t exactly do an effective hit job on ED admissions, if that’s the goal, but this isn’t really the thread for that topic anyway.
Someone from Amherst should do a write-up here on Biddy Martin. Her contributions were many, and I could probably do some of it. But someone with deeper connections to Amherst would be better suited to do her justice. From what I know, her tenure deserves a review.
Also, as some of us have done, it doesn’t all have to be rainbows and sunshine. Any critical angles would be interesting. Nobody’s perfect, and this job entails managing some controversy, which will inevitably lead to the person being a controversial figure to one degree or another.
Trinity College’s encampment is still ongoing. It sounds like students and administrators met yesterday to discuss “the possibility of disciplinary action as well as the encampment’s demands”. It’s not at all clear how discussions are going.