After four months of research, Ohio University has compiled a list of 10 schools that will serve as peer institutions
against which OU wants to measure itself. As currently constructed and named, the list is little more than a cosmetic attempt to define OU's position in the national landscape. If the university is going to use the list, it needs to re-clarify its meaning and use it as a springboard for change.
In an article in Monday's Post, OU President Roderick McDavis acknowledged the peer institutes are 'aspirational universities' and higher in ranking. This admission is just the tip of the iceberg when analyzing the problems in assembling a list of OU's peer institutes.
For a university seemingly so concerned about semantics -administrators were up in arms about insisting their media policy be called a practice or a process when it was discussed in the fall -it seems that the selection of peer institutes is inherently inaccurate. The president has said in so many words that most of the 10 schools listed have reached goals to which OU aspires, but calling them peers implies that OU stands on an equal plane with them.
If OU is serious about getting something out of its list, it should use it as a springboard for some genuine action. Instead of assembling a list of colleges into which OU falls right in the middle, the president could list colleges that excelled in areas OU now lags. He could describe specifically how and why these schools are ones OU must emulate and challenge administrators and faculty to measure up to them.
Without a clear plan of action based on the institutions and with an unrealistic concept of the university's relation to them, the peer institutions are little more than empty words. But, with action and planning, McDavis and OU can use them as a blueprint for improvement.
Headline: More than printer error?
As Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell continues his gubernatorial campaign, he already has had to address potential illegal actions of himself and his staff. In a fund-raising letter seeking donations for his 2006 bid, Blackwell asked for both personal and corporate donations. However, corporate donations are illegal in Ohio. This solicitation is just the latest in a laundry list of Blackwell's alleged improprieties, which included a fiasco about provisional balloting and other problems with the presidential election in Ohio.
Although Blackwell denies any wrongdoing, -claiming an oversight and problems with the template used to produce the letters -it is alarming to witness Blackwell already in campaign mode two years before the election (Blackwell has, in fact, essentially been campaigning for much of his tenure as secretary of state). Further, because of Blackwell's current position, he wields immense power over all elections in Ohio. That is potentially troubling because he could, in theory, interfere with the outcome of any election, including the 2006 governor's race. Although no improprieties have been severe enough to force Blackwell from office, the fund-raising letter puts an air of suspicion around all his actions in the future.
Certainly, the error in the letter could be a simple oversight, as Blackwell claims. But this type of incompetence just won't do, and mirrors past ridiculousness from his office, including hijinks from as recently as the 2004 election -he voided voter registration forms because he said he had problems with their thickness, and he banned reporters and photographers from being near election sites on Election Day. Although Blackwell's camp claims it has received no contributions in response to its illegal solicitations, the mistake nonetheless needs to be investigated. Instead of money, the focus needs to remain on the fact that if the error had not been discovered Blackwell could have gained an illegal advantage over other potential opponents.
Despite his gubernatorial ambitions, Blackwell should concentrate on his secretary of state duties and not divert his attention to a campaign for an office that will face intense competition in two years. In addition, to ensure impartiality, Blackwell would be wise to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the allegations against him and his office. Only then can the citizens of Ohio be sure that any future state election will be just. 17
Archives
The Post Editorial Board
