After seven months, a nationwide search that reviewed more than 50 applicants came to an end last Thursday when Kathy Krendl was named as Ohio University's next provost. Krendl was far from a dark horse; she served as the interim replacement for former Provost Stephen Kopp this school year. Krendl, the former dean of the College of Communication, has a tough road ahead of her to improve both OU's national reputation and the university's inner workings. She will have to address a number of issues as her tenure begins and needs assert herself by seriously considering the administration's policy and not merely becoming a yes woman.
The first of the challenges facing Krendl will be to improve the relationship between the administration and the faculty. In order for the university to prosper the faculty needs to be on board with the policies, procedures and mission statement of the university. Faculty support of the administration is the key to a good working relationship among all OU employees and Provost Krendl must actively consult the faculty about matters concerning the curriculum and heed its collective voice.
Secondly, Krendl has to address the needs of students -especially changes to the General Education requirements. In order to develop fair and acceptable requirements the university, under Krendl's guidance, must start to make small changes and slowly make the general education requirements more appropriate and applicable to students. In doing so it is vital for Krendl to work with the student population and faculty to develop a program that meets the needs of both groups equally.
Also, as the manager of OU's academic programs, Krendl must realize that in order to improve OU's national reputation the university has to walk a fine line between the administration's desire to increase enrollment and preserving the value of an OU degree. Increasing enrollment by lowering admission standards is a double-edged sword: although more students would attend OU, the collective ability could be aversely affected. It will not be an easy task. Krendl must ensure that OU will maintain reasonably high admission standards -to preserve a respectable reputation -even if it means that enrollment must be sacrificed. OU cannot achieve a national reputation if the overall intellectual quality of its student is sacrificed solely to generate more money through new students' tuition.
Finally, Krendl must be sensitive to the effects of OU's goals on the city of Athens. Without local cooperation from city officials and the public, any of the university's long-term goals -like becoming a top quality public university -could be difficult to achieve. Krendl is facing a wide array of questions and needs to show that the administration's faith in her is warranted. And by tackling the issues in a reasoned way she could surely do so, but only time -and her decision-making -will tell.
Hed: Vengeance?
Admitted terrorist conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui has become a central figure in a debate about the right of the U.S. government to execute a foreign citizen that is guilty of plotting a terrorist attack on America. Although the fear of terrorist attacks is at an all-time high in the post-Sept. 11 world, the U.S. government must show restraint by not executing a guilty man merely to satisfy the outrage of a hurt, disillusioned public. Executing Moussaoui will do nothing to repair the American psyche; it will only hamper the United States' mission to end terrorism by martyring an enemy and alienating our international allies.
Moussaoui, who recently pleaded guilty to six felonies all related to a plot to attack the White House, is awaiting punishment, which could yield a death sentence. There are some individuals in the government that would like to make an example out of Moussaoui -an attempt to deter other future terrorists -but in reality killing Moussaoui will do nothing but make him a martyr and strengthen the resolve of American enemies.
Additionally, executing Moussaoui might reduce the willingness of the United States' allies to cooperate with investigations and extradite captured terrorists to the United States for trial. Most notably, Spain has refused to extradite terrorists it captures to the United States if they could be executed, and German authorities have been reluctant to turn over information about Moussaoui to the United States because of concerns that he would be executed. It is impossible for the United States to fight a war on terrorism without the assistance of its allies. By executing Moussaoui the United States could indirectly be rejecting aid from nations also committed to stopping terrorism, which would seriously hamper the current administrations' goals in the war on terror.
Any moral superiority that the United States seeks to find in its quest to eliminate terrorism would be squandered if Moussaoui were executed. America -its officials and its citizens -must resist the urge to take ultimate vengeance against Moussaoui.
17 Archives
The Post Editorial Board
