Charles Vest on the Research University

By Aziz George B. Sayigh | Friday, March 11, 2005

Antedating 1776, institutions of higher education have been a focal point of American society. Other establishments have come and gone, and of course American colleges and universities have changed a great deal, but what is remarkable is actually how little they've changed over these last three centuries. While they are by no means impervious to financial issues, competition, government policy, and fickle public tastes, American universities have overcome those potentially crippling obstacles and have thrived in spite of them. The last twenty years have seen an intense proliferation of new questions, tensions, controversies, and ambiguities—an explosion pervading nearly every aspects of higher education, from undergraduate admissions to research funding.

Charles M. Vest, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology between 1990 and 2004, dealt with these and many other issues as he guided M.I.T. through years of tremendous flux. Pursuing the Endless Frontier: Essays on M.I.T and the Role of Research Universities is a collection of Vest's annual "state of the university" addresses. These forward-looking essays illuminate the most pressing issues in higher education, technology policy, and science. The essays generally display sound logic and are argued articulately with grace and meticulousness, making them easy to appreciate and thoroughly informative.

Consider some of the topics he assayed:

· America's universities continue to be the best in the world, while the K-12 system is slipping further down the totem pole, especially in the 'hard sciences.' Is it possible to maintain superiority in the former without improving the latter? Foreign citizens are making up a larger proportion of the student body at universities, particularly at engineering and computer science graduate schools, and more of them are returning to their homeland with the degree. Why are American youth losing both interest and ability in these fields? Vest cites "parental indifference, students with low expectations, outdated infrastructure, political infighting, misplaced ideology, meaningless bureaucracies, and insufficient financial support." Tough words, especially for a university president.

· Should women and minorities be given admissions preference, or should admissions be based purely on merit? Vest believes "that the time will come when affirmative action programs will no longer be necessary, but for now, we still have need," a sentiment that was echoed by the Supreme Court a few years later when they issued their Grutter v. Bollinger decision in 2003.

· What is the best use of the limited financial-aid funds available to universities- merit or need-based aid? In 1991, the Justice Department challenged the Ivy League schools and M.I.T.'s practice of offering only need-based financial aid, claiming that their collusion was a violation of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. M.I.T., under Vest's leadership, fought the challenge forcefully, and won. He does not go into much depth about his rationale for fighting the order, but he does say that he felt it was "the best use of the limited financial-aid funds available." Student financial aid is easily one the fastest growing components of campus operating budgets at many elite schools, adding to the already growing financial burden.

· Some educators feel that professors at research universities devote too much time to research and writing and not enough time to teaching. Vest argues that, contrary to what some may say, research universities offer the best possible education, even for undergraduates; that there is a fine balance between undergraduate study, graduate study, and research. This is one of the bolder positions Vest takes, and I am not sure it is entirely defensible. Although he does qualify it by saying that ideally undergraduates should be able to spend more time with their professors, I know quite well from personal experience that the quality of education I have received at Dartmouth is very different from the abattoir instruction of M.I.T. undergrads.

· It is axiomatic that just because science and technology can do a thing does not mean that it should do it. Beyond that, it is not as clear. Where should the line be drawn, and who should decide? Should research grants be used to promote social goals or the pure pursuit of knowledge? Should the government be more willing to take risks on longer term, larger scale research projects, or should taxpayers expect immediate benefits? Vest, as usual, emphasizes balance when confronting these questions. However, he does recall that scientific risk-taking is part of what has made this country great, and he said the Human Genome Project and the Space Station are two examples of risky ventures that are about to pay large dividends.

These are some of the most loaded questions facing the world today, and a single book cannot begin to cover the complexities involved. For this reason, Vest leaves most of these questions somewhat unanswered, generally qualifying the various viewpoints and only vaguely mentioning his own stance. It should also be kept in mind that these essays were originally speeches delivered to the faculty and the student body, with all the requisite political correctness and unobjectionable rhetoric. This causes the essays to be slightly verbose, repetitive (nearly every essay mentions diversity and the environment at least once), and less direct then Vest perhaps would have liked. Nevertheless, he still manages to get at the heart of the matter most of the time, offering an undeniably enlightening look into the world of higher education.

Charles Vest on the Research University

Article Tools

Related Articles