University Provost Christopher Eisgruber ’83 and Wilson School professor and former dean Anne-Marie Slaughter ’80 are speculated by faculty to be the front-runners to replace outgoing University president Shirley Tilghman, according to interviews with faculty members this week.
The presidential search committee is scheduled to meet in Princeton this weekend to discuss the state of the search. Meanwhile, interviews with a dozen professors indicate speculation is already coalescing around Eisgruber and Slaughter.
All of the professors interviewed made clear they did not know any official inside information about the search. Faculty members were granted anonymity in order to speak freely.
A vast majority of the faculty members interviewed conveyed that Eisgruber should and would be a leading candidate to replace Tilghman. At the beginning of the week, audience members at Monday’s Council of the Princeton University Community meeting gave Eisgruber a round of applause when his name was mentioned in association with the open presidential position.
Eisgruber has served as provost, the number-two position in the University, since 2004, when then-provost Amy Gutmann left to serve as president of Penn. As provost, Eisgruber has overseen both the University’s academic programs and its budget during a time of financial crisis.
Some faculty members cited his “judicious” nature and his track record in guiding the University through choppy economic times. Others noted that as provost Eisgruber already has strong relationships with both the faculty as well as the University Board of Trustees.
“If there’s a bar, [Eisgruber] is so far above it … I trust him,” one department chair said. “I think Chris Eisgruber would make a splendid president,” another professor said in a separate interview.
Tilghman herself is completely uninvolved in the search process and has declined to comment on specific candidates’ prospects, though she did meet with the search committee on Thursday to discuss her job’s responsibilities. When asked to comment this week on Eisgruber’s and Slaughter’s contributions to the University — not as potential candidates — Tilghman praised Eisgruber, calling him “extraordinary” and noted that many people share her view.
“His contributions are so diverse because there’s literally not an aspect of the University that the provost does not influence in one way,” Tilghman said.
One professor wondered, however, whether Eisgruber would even want the job. While the professor acknowledged the provost would “certainly be very good” as president because he already knows how to run the University, the professor also noted that oftentimes provosts do not necessarily want to leave their current position for the more public job of University president. But last week, Yale named its provost as its next president.
Eisgruber said Thursday he did not consider himself a candidate for the presidency. After his term concludes as provost, he said, he expected to return to the Wilson School, where he taught full-time before being named provost.
Another professor voiced concern Eisgruber might be too Princeton-centric to replace Tilghman. While the professor acknowledged the provost was undoubtedly qualified for the job, the professor said Eisgruber’s extensive immersion in Princeton — including four years as an undergraduate and 11 years as a faculty member — might hinder his ability to succeed in the global, outward-looking position of president.
A potential alternative to Eisgruber with experience in the global arena is Slaughter, who served as director of policy planning at the State Department from 2009 to 2011. But like Eisgruber, Slaughter is steeped in Princeton. She attended the University as an undergraduate and taught has here since 2002, when she left Harvard to lead the Wilson School. She is also married to politics professor Andrew Moravcsik.
Some faculty members interviewed also mentioned Slaughter as a front-runner for the position, though fewer than the number who mentioned Eisgruber.
Professors cited Slaughter’s national fame, political connections and her past leadership history at the Wilson School as possible reasons why she would be chosen as the next president.
Tilghman also spoke of Slaughter warmly, noting her work at the University promoting international relations and public service. Tilghman noted Slaughter’s work with the Scholars in the Nation’s Service program as one of Slaughter’s major accomplishments.
“She put public service visibly on the front-burner. And then, ultimately, she walked the walk by becoming a public servant herself in the State Department,” Tilghman said.
One professor, however, shared a different view. This professor was concerned that a Slaughter presidency would be “a disaster” because of what the professor felt was her inability to separate her strong political views from her work. Such an unabashedly partisan leader, the professor said, could ultimately hinder the University’s standing in the future.
Slaughter did not respond to a request for comment Thursday.
This summer, Slaughter re-entered the national spotlight when she authored a cover story in The Atlantic arguing that it is extremely difficult for women to balance their families and their careers.
Slaughter was also considered for the Harvard presidency in 2007, a job that ultimately went to Drew Faust.
Some professors indicated they believed the choice of the presidential search committee would hinge largely on how the University Board of Trustees viewed their relationship with Tilghman. If they viewed Tilghman’s tenure as successful, the committee would most likely choose an “in-house” candidate like Eisgruber from within the University to continue down the course Tilghman had set.
If the trustees viewed Tilghman’s tenure negatively, however, some speculated the University could end up choosing a president with a corporate background. Indeed, some members of the local community mentioned in a series of four open forums this week that they would like to see a president from the business world.
The possibility of choosing a president with a background outside of academia was a point of concern for some faculty members, who voiced the belief that such a president might not understand the intricacies of running an educational institution like Princeton. They worried a president from a business background might value efficiency over some of the other educational values many faculty members said are critical to Princeton’s function as a premier University.
Another professor expressed near certainty the candidate chosen would be from academia and would most likely be an in-house candidate — comparable to Tilghman in many ways, who was a faculty member before being chosen. The professor reasoned that institutions like Princeton only search externally when something is wrong. Since the University has had a period of success, the professor said, there would be no reason for the search committee to look beyond its own walls.
One external candidate mentioned previously in association with the presidential opening was David Petraeus GS ’87, who has expressed interest in the position. Last week, however, Petraeus resigned from his position as CIA director due to an extramarital affair, clouding his reputation and chances of leading Nassau Hall.
Though Petraeus may now be looking for a job at a moment when the University is looking for a candidate, nearly every professor interviewed said they believed the former general’s marital indiscretion and resignation have thoroughly ended his candidacy.
Even professors who weren’t willing to discuss other possible presidential candidates or hadn’t given much thought to the subject seemed absolutely certain Petraeus was no longer in the running to replace Tilghman.
“I might not be able to tell you who’s [a candidate], but I can definitely tell you who is not,” one professor said, referring to Petraeus.
Nearly all of the professors interviewed said they had not often discussed the topic of choosing the next president with their colleagues. Many said they hadn’t given the issue much thought, especially since individual faculty members have little power when it comes to the actual presidential selection.
All University faculty took part in an election earlier in the semester to select four professors to serve on the search committee tasked with choosing the next president.
Physics professor Lyman Page, philosophy professor Gideon Rosen GS ’92, mechanical and aerospace engineering professor Howard Stone and sociology department chair Miguel Centeno were ultimately chosen by the faculty and now serve on the committee.
News Editor Teddy Schleifer contributed reporting.
Read More
Princeton launches ‘Stand Up’ website, alumni newsletter in response to federal attacks
Devon RudolphPrinceton University released a statement announcing a new initiative called “Stand Up,” reaffirming the University’s commitment to freedom of speech and academic research funding, while criticizing the new presidential administration’s federal funding cuts.
Princeton University released a statement announcing a new initiative called “Stand Up,” reaffirming the University’s commitment to freedom of speech and academic research funding, while criticizing the new presidential administration’s federal funding cuts.
May Day protest draws hundreds at Princeton in support of labor, immigration, and Palestine
Sena Chang and Luke GrippoProtesters organized by Resistencia en Acción in New Jersey gathered on May 1 to express concerns about U.S. immigration policies, the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict, and labor rights issues.
Protesters organized by Resistencia en Acción in New Jersey gathered on May 1 to express concerns about U.S. immigration policies, the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict, and labor rights issues.
84 acts, 15 porches, and 30-mile-an-hour winds: students and community enjoy Porchfest
Isabella RobertsDespite light rain and clouds during the day, Porchfest continued without interruption. Students, professors, Princeton locals, and others could all be seen enjoying the day’s performances all over town.
Despite light rain and clouds during the day, Porchfest continued without interruption. Students, professors, Princeton locals, and others could all be seen enjoying the day’s performances all over town.