Poor leadership, low rankings

In its Sept. 11 issue, U.S. News and World Report excluded IU from its list of top 50 national universities. President Myles Brand was quick to point out the flaws in its rankings -- which he does every year when IU ranks poorly. \nIU did make it as a "second-tier" university and was a staggering 26th in top public universities.\nBrand said students and parents shouldn't trust the rankings: The magazine considers the wrong criteria. IU wasn't even ranked in the top 46 as a "Best Value" for national universities. Nor did it appear on the list of 124 "Best Value" schools in the midwest.\nWhen asked if the University's rankings were falling, he replied: "No, it is not true," on his Web site, www.indiana.edu/president. He added that if you took away IU's low per-student spending, "moderate" admissions standards, and the fact that we don't have an engineering, medical or agricultural school, our "overall ranking among public universities in U.S. News has still improved over the last six years." \nThe problem is that all universities are rated the same way, and the top students and faculty of tomorrow use these rankings to choose their next academic destination. University presidents cannot decide which categories to include and which to omit. \nWhen asked about the University of Florida's rankings of the nation's top research universities, Brand replied on his Web site: "This is the first time those rankings have been done … it is impossible to use them as a measurement of improvement or decline." \nWhat he didn't tell you is that IU was once considered a leading institution in the field of research. Now we are ninth in the Big Ten. People who have invested considerable resources in research at IU can't be happy. \nHere's one big reason IU is slipping:\nEnrollment is at an all-time high this year. Brand and the administration are quick to say this is a reflection on the quality of students we enroll. What they didn't tell you is the number of students admitted this year is up 1,139. Acceptance rates are at a whopping 86 percent, according to Barron's Profiles of American Colleges 2001 edition.\nIn the last five years, the percentage of students in the top 10 percent of their high school class has dropped 4 percent, according to enrollment services. \nIn that same time, enrollment of students in the bottom 50 percent of their classes has increased 7 percent, according to enrollment services. While 276 of the top 10 percent of students have gone elsewhere, 482 of the bottom half of students are now being accepted. IU is trading students ranked at the top of their high school class for students ranked at the bottom. That doesn't reflect quality, just quantity.\nWe cannot fault the professors. With so many students in a lecture, they can't give every student attention. Many have complained about the amount of remedial work their students need. Why? Because each year, we are letting in more students ranked at the bottom of their class.\nOn Brand's Web site, he writes, "At IU, our commitment to excellence is at the heart of all we do. We encourage our students and faculty to be the very best." But look at the enrollment numbers.\nOn national television, as on "ESPN: Outside the Lines," Brand will say IU is ranked fourth in the nation in arts, humanities and social sciences. Not so, said professor Peter Bondanella, member of the Steering Committee of the Alliance of Distinguished and Titled Rank Professors -- which monitors the level of excellence and quality at IU.\n"I'm afraid that such a statement is sadly mistaken," Bondanella said in the IDS. He said people who have low rankings are on the defensive.\nWhen asked why we can't keep our first-rate faculty members, Brand replied on his Web site: "Because of financial limitations, IU sometimes cannot match offers from elsewhere." \nSo that's why five chemistry professors have left IU in the last five years, because we don't have the money to match other schools' offers? That's not what George Christou, the most recent chemistry professor to announce his departure, said.\n"We no longer are attractive to the best people," Christou told the IDS. This comes from the man who was awarded with IU's Teaching Excellence Recognition Award this year and who has been here 18 years -- longer than Brand.\nIn his State of the University address, Brand said, "On the issue of faculty salaries, I should note that I have been an advocate for higher faculty salaries since I came to IU." \nThe bare minimum raise a faculty member can be given is 1 percent, but most receive a 2 percent raise. Distinguished professor Gail Hanson had this to say in the IDS:\n"For them to give me a 1 percent raise is just insulting to me." \nBrand is due for another 6 percent increase next year. He should be embarrassed to be receiving huge salary increases when the University is going down the toilet. But he's not. \nTrustees President John Walda came to Brand's defense and said, "We have (a president) who's so dedicated to this institution. He's obviously motivated by something more than money and prestige," the IDS reported. Sure.\nBrand will tell you the rankings make me very angry and frustrated," but he does nothing to change the situation. \nHe'll get on national television and lie about where IU is ranked. \nHe'll make promises and then break them; make excuses for IU's rankings done by reputable institutions.\nIn his freshman induction speech Aug. 23, Brand closed by saying, "Question what you hear. Never give up your search for the truth."\nI'm not.\nTomorrow we elect a new President of the United States. It's time we do the same here at IU.