Throughout University President Lawrence Bacow's tenure, Tufts has experienced enormous change and growth. Since Bacow took the reins a decade ago, he has led the campus through periods of student-body growth, an increase in university prestige and, most recently, national economic uncertainty. While lauding his accomplishments, however, we must be mindful of his shortcomings and urge President-elect Anthony Monaco to address these issues as Tufts moves into a new era of leadership.
Bacow, an economist by trade, sought policies that have solidified the university's financial standing. One year into his term, he quietly initiated the Beyond Boundaries capital campaign. An extremely ambitious program — it aimed to generate $1.2 billion by June of this year — it has already met over 97 percent of its goal, or $1.17 billion. The campaign advances Bacow's vision for Tufts: improving the quality of student life and academics through financial aid, endowed professorships and facility improvements at each of Tufts' three campuses.
Bacow saw the role of the endowment as providing stability, not growth. His decision to use the endowment, which is more susceptible to market fluctuation than other sources of university revenue, for only a small portion of operating costs was a wise one. His financial foresight proved particularly adept during the economic crisis and has allowed Tufts to avoid the budget cuts so many other institutions have had to carry out to stay afloat. He leaves Tufts in a strong position for the future.
Along with the litany of successes that Bacow has achieved during his time as president, there have been shortcomings that should be addressed in the next administration. Monaco will take the helm at the end of June. From the outset, he will undoubtedly feel pressure from all sides to spend more money and implement more projects, but he must be prudent in his choices. Students complain of unsatisfactory dormitories, and faculty lament the shortage of research space. These are reasonable complaints, but Monaco should be sure to respond to these demands in the long run, rather than attempt to fix them immediately. In the short term, his attention should be centered on financial accessibility, quality of academics and institutional diversity.
Converting to a completely need-blind admissions process was a goal that Bacow aspired to but failed to achieve. Yes, the university unofficially adopted a need-blind policy when it admitted the classes of 2011 and 2012, but the financial crisis dealt a blow to this plan. Establishing need-blind as a permanent fixture of admissions should be one of Monaco's highest priorities. If we truly wish to be a diverse and dynamic campus, it is imperative to disregard financial need as a qualification for admission to Tufts.
Yet the issue of financial accessibility is manifold, stemming most obviously from considerable rises in tuition rates. Tuition and fees have increased from $30,817 in the 1998-99 academic year to $51,088 in academic year 2009-10. Although tuition hikes are a national problem, this is no excuse for Tufts riding the wave. A $20,000 tuition increase over the next decade, like the one before it, would be unbearable. Preventing exorbitant tuition increases will not only reduce the extent of financial aid requested but will also help protect middle-class students who do not qualify for need-based aid but cannot keep up with constantly rising costs.
Monaco should also focus on furthering the quality of academics at Tufts. To preserve our elite status, he should continue to be cognizant of hiring for tenure-track positions, often easy to forgo during difficult economic times. Monaco should also prioritize investing in research and graduate programs, which contribute to higher national rankings. These programs are large sources of money for universities, as research can lead to government grants, and strong programs further attract high-level faculty. A balance must be struck, however: Unlike a number of peer institutions, Tufts undergrads have historically been a high priority for the administration. A bolstered focus on graduate programs should not leave undergraduate academics in the shadows.
The final priority should be in the area of institutional diversity. Regardless of our reputation as an internationally oriented establishment, Tufts is not such a diverse place. Last year, a study found that only 7.7 percent of Tufts' tenure-track faculty were African-American or Hispanic. Though this is on par with other Boston-area schools, it is still far less than satisfactory. At a time when a number of senior administrators are leaving Tufts, the Monaco administration has an opportunity to make having a diverse background just as substantial a qualification in the hiring process as academic and professional credentials.
Bacow has exceptionally maintained the university's financial footing and its reputation for and commitment to academic excellence. We laud him and are grateful for his 10 years of service, responding to every email and Halloween trick-or-treater along the way. Yet Bacow's tenure was not perfect. At this time of transition, what Bacow leaves to be done indicates not holes in his presidency but instead opportunities for Monaco's.
