Stroking Egos

I find that natural leaders have a problem conceding power or authority to a designated leader in a group, disrupting the group dynamic. This can be tragic. My leadership experiences incorporate those times when I wore the “Leader Badge” and those when I was encouraged to follow. The latter requires an acquired sense of balancing.

There are two different types of potentially awkward situations that can result from a leader trying to follow: those times when the designated leader is incapable of doing the job and those times when they are. I have generally found success in following those who are competent and capable of leading the group, but my natural tendency to take over when something is failing can create friction with the designated inept leader.

Providing leadership in these positions is always dependent on the persynality of the designated leader. I tend to ‘buddy-up’ to the leader, becoming their friend and confidant who is able to push tips or suggestions under the theoretical door. This way, I don’t feel like I am attacking their capabilities in any way but still overriding their bad decisions. I may even develop a new friendship in the process. My approach is founded in the inherent understanding that people need to have their egos stroked a little before being criticized in any way – especially those given a position of power.

Policy v. Value

Examining the different policy intentions of presidential candidates seems counterproductive in trying to predict what higher education would look like under their leadership. It is such a rare occasion when a president can come into office and begin passing legislation that they communicated on the campaign trail. Instead, we should examine the values reflected in their intended policies.

Of the three remaining contenders, Clinton has the most extensive experience working for education reform. During her time as First Lady, she indicated her commitment to education through establishing programs like Early Head Start and providing incentives to teachers working in high-needs areas. During her time as Senator, Clinton has been adament about pushing education legislation which increases the Pell Grant and improves access for students with disabilities.

Though Obama has spent less time passing legislation, his voting record indicates he would adamently work to afford access to education for more Americans. He recently voted for legislation to grant 'illegal aliens' permanent status if they met certain critiera, one of which is that they were under 16 when they first entered the US. He also voted to increase the maximum Pell Grant (for affordable education) and appears to desire easy access through eliminating the FASFA.

Both have similar policies; both have similar voting records. It is impossible for me to choose one or the other based on higher education intentions. Obama values things like bipartisan cooperation, transparency in politics, and supporting the lower class. One of the only differences between the two appears to be their involvement in politics - Clinton has led a life extensively involved in the game, moving from one venue to the next. Obama took time off of the legal track to organize poor communities in Chicago - a red flag for his commitment to people, and thus higher education.

A World of Values

Creating a new university from scratch cannot be fully explained in a few paragraphs, but there are a few core aspects which I find critical in any institution. My logistical preferences include a small (student body < 4,000) liberal arts womyn’s college built into a residential area amidst a larger city.

Considering the increasing interdependence of the world community, I feel like it is imperative that the core of this institution revolve around international diversity and development – not only will students travel abroad and enjoy emersion into a different culture, but the curriculum will intensely focus on aspects of world significance. The university will have a stellar language program and be known for its study abroad experiences. Finding students from all over the world and from all different economic classes is important to integrate what we do in a classroom to how we live as a community of people.

The university will uphold a strong set of values like intellectual integrity, honesty, equality, and above all, respect. A campus-wide honor code will be upheld at all costs and guide the actions of our community on and off of campus – we will treat our workers with respect through fair wages and healthcare; student concerns will be considered by individual boards with a variety of representatives; parents and alums will be directly involved in the happenings of the community by whatever means available; participating in the larger city will be of upmost importance, incorporating neighboring colleges, high schools, and non-profit organizations.

I feel like I can talk about this for hours – there is so much to consider when developing a new university, but one of the most important considerations in developing an institution is transparent values. Understanding that finding similar values for a large group of people is difficult, there will need to be a representative community voice to monitor the actions of the changing, evolving university.