Interviewing University President Candidates

I am on the board of trustees of Florida Polytechnic University. Recently we chose a president and I asked each candidate we interviewed one of the following hypotheticals to understand their thinking on academic freedom and academic integrity. I’m posting them because I think they could be useful to others on committees choosing university deans, provosts, and presidents. I also provide in bold the type of answer I was hoping for.

1. A student posts the following message on X: “My data science professor has been promoting the Zionist genocide in Palestine. Here is the professor’s publicly available email. Let her know what you think!” The professor subsequently receives death threats via email. 

As a public university Florida Poly is bound by the First Amendment. Criticizing someone and revealing their publicly available email does not rise to the level of harassment, so I would not sanction the student. I would report any threats the professor forwards to me to the police. 

2. A computer science professor writes a magazine article whose thesis is that there are more men than women in his field because on average men are more interested in things and women are more interested in people and relationships. 5 faculty and 100 students sign a letter to you saying that the article harmed them and created a hostile environment. They demand that you issue a public statement denouncing the professor and mandate that he receive sensitivity training. 

As a public university Florida Poly is bound by the First Amendment. I would ignore the letter and issue a statement affirming the right of faculty to express their views publicly.

3. A group of militant vegans occupies your office and refuses to leave until all animal products are removed from campus cafeterias and restaurants. They also demand vegan food deliveries three times per day while they are in your office, and bathroom breaks from their occupation.

As a public university Florida Poly is bound by the First Amendment. Florida Poly can regulate the time, place, and manner of protest, but not the content. Protests that disrupt the study and work of other community members are not acceptable. I would inform the vegans that they have until 1p to leave my office. If they are not out by then, I would have them arrested for trespassing and expelled. 

4. The provost suggests that you create a special fund that could only be used for hiring faculty from underrepresented groups and would exclude Asian and white males. How would you respond?

This is a violation of civil rights law (Title VI, Title IX) unless it is a time-limited affirmative action subject to strict oversight. There’s no clause that says you can discriminate as long as you think it's for a good reason.  If you can’t make a fund specifically to hire Asian and white males, you can’t make a fund that specifically excludes them. Moreover, such a fund would undermine the academic integrity of the university. I would say no and start the process of replacing the provost.

5. The electrical engineering department posts a statement on the front page of their website reading “This department affirms that American policing fails in a fundamental way and represents a system of oppression that must be dismantled and abolished. We call on all our students and faculty to show solidarity and take action in this fight. Silence is violence.” 

Academic freedom is an individual right, not a collective right. Collective statements create an environment where dissent is discouraged. I would order the statement taken down and replace the department chair with someone who would focus on electrical engineering.

---

H. Keith Moo-Young got question 5 and did very well with it. Unfortunately the responses I got from the other candidates were not very good. Not one mentioned the First Amendment, Title VI, or Title IX. Many of the responses involved talking without actually answering the question or saying what they would do specifically. In general, it was clear that the candidates were not prepared for dealing with situations like this. Since the were very prepared generally, this suggests that they did not prioritize these issues, and did not anticipate that the board would.

When all was said and done, I ended up voting for G. Devin Stephenson, who will be the next President. Here was my reasoning: The main goals of Florida Poly are to double its student body size and to significantly increase the scope and visibility of research efforts. The most important skills a president must have to achieve these goals are an ability to sell and promote Poly externally and an ability to obtain funds and other resources from the state.  I thought Stephenson had demonstrated these skills best among the candidates. So even though academic freedom and academic integrity are my issues and I’m glad I brought them to everyone’s attention during the interview process, I felt that other considerations outweighed them in the choice I had to make about what was best for the university. That said, I am hoping I can discuss these issues with Stephenson during his time as president.