The Rice Thresher

Location: http://the.ricethresher.org/news/2005/08/19/leebron_call_conversation

August 19, 2005 > News > Leebron releases Call to Conversation, seeks input

Leebron releases Call to Conversation, seeks input

By Amber Obermeyer | Thresher Editorial Staff

President David Leebron e-mailed all undergraduate students in July with a “Call to Conversation.” In the document, he wrote that Rice should aim to become more nationally focused and increase overall enrollment by about 30 percent, while selectively choosing programs to expand or contract.

Leebron said the idea to publish a document like the Call to Conversation, which poses many questions — and proposes some answers — emerged during conversations he had with the deans late last fall. Leebron wrote the initial draft early in the spring before circulating it to the deans and vice presidents and later to the Board of Trustees to gather feedback before releasing the final version.

“To some extent I’ve spent a year or more doing informal question and answers,” Leebron said. “It was important to begin to bring together conversations in a focused way and to make the process both transparent and inclusive by getting the Call to Conversation out in writing to all constituencies.”

Leebron said he will use the opinions he gathers to put together a document — probably with the help of a committee or task force — laying out the university’s goals for the next 7-10 years, which he will present to the Board of Trustees at the end of the semester. Leebron said he is in the process of gathering feedback through the Call to Conversation Web site, as well as through forums and meetings to be held this fall.

Student Association President James Lloyd said the SA will co-host a forum with the President’s Office at 8:30 p.m. on Sept. 12, at which students can give Leebron their feedback on the Call to Conversation.

Leebron said he has already received feedback in letters, conversations, and in more than 800 comments on the Web site, including more than 300 from undergraduates.

“Nothing has shocked me, and I think that the best thing is that the feedback has been very thoughtful,” he said. “All constituencies have been very balanced — for example, undergraduate students have written me about the importance of supporting graduate students. What’s been most encouraging is that people aren’t entirely predictable. They often have the larger best interest of the university at heart.”

The Call to Conversation

Leebron introduced the document by writing that universities face an increasingly competitive environment.

“Success in that environment requires re-evaluation, evolution and change if we are to maintain the level of excellence … for which we are known,” Leebron wrote.

Leebron wrote that Rice’s comparative advantages lie in its size, its emphasis on undergraduate education, its identification of focused areas of strength, its ease of interdisciplinary study and its breadth of excellence.

“Because we are small, the choices we make are extremely important,” Leebron wrote. “We must be prepared not only to begin new endeavors but, in some cases, to reduce our commitment to areas that no longer serve our strategic aims well.”

Leebron proceeded to write that Rice must grow to achieve its ambitions.

“Research universities require a substantial infrastructure, and that infrastructure is subject to certain economies of scale,” Leebron wrote. “Certain departments must grow if they are to achieve a national reputation, and there are new and important areas of teaching and research in which Rice must participate if it is to be competitive. To draw a national student body, we must also be able to attract employers from all over the country.

If Rice grew to about 3,600-3,800 undergraduates, it would still be much smaller than its competitors,” Leebron wrote.

Such expansion would require more undergraduate housing, including two new colleges and possibly off-campus housing as well, Leebron wrote.

Leebron also wrote that graduate programs must grow in order to achieve prominence.

“A rough indication is that we would need approximately 500 to 800 additional graduate students,” Leebron wrote.

While in the midst of this growth, Rice must maintain its small class sizes and build more facilities, including lab space and undergraduate housing, Leebron wrote.

In a section devoted to the “undergraduate experience,” Leebron wrote that Rice is unique in the quality of its teaching and must continue to attract top undergraduate students. To do so, Rice should become more national and more international, he wrote.

“We should remain a distinctly Texas-based university while increasing the percentage of students we attract from outside of Texas,” Leebron wrote. “Continuing to enroll about the same number of students from Texas while growing the number of students from elsewhere would result in a student body that was approximately 40 percent in-state and 60 percent out-of-state. We should also seek an undergraduate student body that is more international, more than doubling the present two to three percent.”

Leebron also wrote that Rice should be committed to a holistic undergraduate education.

“First, we educate the whole person, inside and outside the classroom,” Leebron wrote. “Second, we set standards for the education of all our undergraduates. While me must recognize the distinctiveness of education in architecture, engineering and music, we must, at the same time, develop common standards for a liberal arts education.”

Rice students must also learn how to lead and communicate well in order to succeed after graduation, Leebron wrote. Rice should also increase opportunities for undergraduates to study abroad and conduct research, he wrote.

“Our opportunities for foreign study now consist of placements for one to two students at a time,” Leebron wrote. “We should seek to develop, in addition, deeper relationships with partner institutions in selected countries.”

Leebron also asked questions about the colleges.

“Are the residential colleges living up to their original aspirations?” Leebron wrote. “How might we enhance their roles with respect to the widest group of students? How can we improve the opportunities for intellectual growth within the college setting?”

An upgraded recreation center is important to compete with other schools, Leebron wrote.

Addressing graduate education, Leebron wrote that Rice should increase its stipends for graduate students, especially in the social sciences and humanities, in order to attract the best students. Graduate students must also have more teaching opportunities to help them become better candidates for academic jobs, he wrote.

“We must assure that these opportunities are provided in a manner consistent with the distinctive character of Rice’s undergraduate education, namely that the vast majority of courses continue to be taught by faculty members,” Leebron wrote.

Leebron also asked about the relationship between graduates and undergraduates outside of the classroom.

“How can we better integrate our graduate students into the life of the university and, in particular, build better bridges between our graduate and undergraduate populations?” Leebron wrote. “Our graduate students have been, for example, largely excluded from participating in the life of the colleges, even though such participation was envisioned as part of the original plan.”

Leebron asked whether current graduate programs should be expanded or contracted and whether new programs should be added. Leebron suggested Rice could benefit from adding more post-doctoral students, and asked what changes would be necessary to best employ them.

In a section titled “Research and scholarship,” Leebron asked whether Rice is adequately publicizing faculty research.

“In national rankings of our departments (other than music and architecture), only one [bioengineering] is ranked in the top 10,” Leebron wrote. “Can we set a goal within a decade of having at least eight departments achieve such recognition?”

Leebron asked whether Rice is involved enough in collaborative research, both within the university and with institutions like those in the Texas Medical Center. Rice must build facilities and upgrade its library and information technology to accompany its research ambitions, Leebron wrote.

In “Our Community,” Leebron asked whether Rice is sufficiently involved with Houston.

“Is there a way Rice can make distinctive contributions to some of the fundamental problems that Houston faces, including K-12 education, environmental quality and the delivery of health care?” he wrote.

Finally, Leebron wrote that Rice must prioritize its academic pursuits on the basis of certain criteria.

“Six criteria seem most relevant in selecting academic departments or centers for strategic enhancement: 1) the possibility of making new and important contributions to knowledge, 2) the social importance of the subject matter, 3) student demand for courses and teaching in that area, 4) the possibility of achieving national preeminence in that area, 5) opportunities to leverage the endeavor both internally (with other departments and centers) and externally (with other institutions here in Houston), and 6) the availability of entrepreneurial and visionary leadership to guide the endeavor,” Leebron wrote.

Leebron also asked if Rice should add more interdisciplinary centers, suggesting centers on the human mind and human reason, computational and information sciences, urban studies and energy.

Rice should also have an increased focus on education and research concerning Latin America, China and India, Leebron wrote.

In the conclusion to the document, Leebron acknowledged that his comments and questions were likely to raise controversy.

“It is the nature of a great university to ask hard questions, not only about the rest of the world but about itself,” Leebron wrote. “We must be willing to discuss candidly the challenges and opportunities we confront, to make decisions and to move Rice forward.”

The response

Leebron said he has received the most feedback about the issue of the university’s size.

“It has been less contentious than I would have expected,” Leebron said. “There has been a lot of support for roughly the kind of increase in size the Call to Conversation suggests and, at the same time, concern that expansion be taken carefully to preserve the distinct features of Rice. Some people have said we should be larger, some have said we shouldn’t grow at all, but so far the judgments have been fairly nuanced.”

Leebron said feedback has shown some issues are more urgent than others.

“I regard the Rec Center as a very pressing issue — internationalization is also a pressing issue, as well as going across the nation more aggressively and letting people know about Rice,” Leebron said. “While we need to make a decision about what size we’ll be, that will take years to implement.”

Leebron said he has also received some feedback unrelated to any of the topics in the Call to Conversation.

“The Call to Conversation has served as a great vehicle not only to discuss what’s specifically in it but also to furrow out what’s been on people’s minds,” Leebron said. “People will say, ‘Gee, all this sounds right, but let me tell you about the things that have been really bothering me.’ I’ve been able to find out what people are really unhappy about.”

Lovett College senior Adam Parsons said he is concerned with the idea of adding off-campus housing.

“Take away the seniors and what have you got left?” he said.

Hanszen College sophomore Ian Ragsdale said growth could be positive or negative for Rice.

“I think increasing the size could bring more money to Rice, but I wonder how [Leebron] is going to use that money,” he said. “Is he going to bring in more researchers or better teachers?”

Students, faculty, staff, alumni and others can download the Call to Conversation and submit comments to Leebron at http://cohesion.rice.edu/administration/presidentsoffice/c2c/index2.cfm. Comments will be accepted until Nov. 15.

End of article

Back to top