December 7, 2006
A New Face in Foggy Bottom
Stephen Joel Trachtenberg has been president of the George Washington University for 19 years, raising the school's profile tremendously and turning into it the city's largest private employer. The city even named December 4th "Stephen Joel Trachtenberg Day." Holidays aside, SJT's tenure has not come without some controversy, generally stemming from Foggy Bottom residents, who complain that the university is too large and unresponsive. But come August 1, Trachtenberg won't be president anymore.
Trachtenberg announced his retirement last spring to be effective July 31, and this week the University selected Johns Hopkins University provost Steven Knapp to replace him. Knapp is said to be a quiet listener, something neighbors will surely appreciate. And like Trachtenberg, he's known as a good fundraiser. But unlike at Gallaudet, everybody seems to like Knapp.
It remains to be seen what this means for GW, as picking a new president is a lot like picking a Supreme Court justice — it's hard to say what the person will do once they're in office. Land in the Foggy Bottom area is at a premium, and while the neighbors haven't been able to stop many of GW's newer projects, the fate of the old hospital site still looms.
The GW Hatchet, GW's student newspaper, has a lot more on Knapp.
Snowy GWU photo by alex-s
|
I could give two shits about GW, but that picture is quite awesome and makes me long for the first real snowfall of the season.
Thank goodness for this -- perhaps the new president will remember that the mandate of a university is to educate, not to alienate by ignoring academics in favor of expansion and building. Farewell, SJT and cronies.
SJT is not really a good fundraiser. He's good at raising funds using real estate not by asking donors for money. That is why we are in the middle of a huge budget shortfall and have such a low alumna giving rate.
Hogwash about SJT not being a good fundraiser. The university's endowment has grown massively (tee hee) during his tenure.
But SJT did suck major ass when it came to being non-arrogant, non-obnoxious, non-patronizing when dealing with FoBo residents, students, and just about anyone else.
GW leadership has been remarkably efficient at alienating its students and alumni.
Knapp, at 55, almost looks older than SJT (68)....
I agree about the fundraising - its not a big deal at all when real estate is in the game plan. GW always loves to overrate itself. Want to see a SJT legacy, see how soon after he arrived, the change in the board, how many lawyer-types with too close for comfort affiliations and ties that are conflict-of-interest anyhwere else, and how many doctors who had second practices outside of GW, who all milked GW as a cash cow, rather than take pride in an educational institution to invest in for EDUCATION. Sorry folks, its not a secret either.
SJT was in a no-win situation when dealing with the endlessly complaining FoBo residents. For years, they clamored for GW to build more residence halls on-campus. When GW finally agreed to do that, the FBA and ANC OPPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW DORMS. It's painfully obvious to anyone who has ever observed this conflict that the FoBo residents will oppose any and all actions by GW, for no reason other than petty spite.
There's a bit more to it than that, Matt. For starters, GW can't seem to adhere to the legally-binding campus plan document. If the Foggy Bottom folks sometimes come accross as crazed, GW drove them to it.
SJT has run GW as a business. He displays very little regard for either his own students or the neighborhood.
Amen, GWalum2. SJT was always very frank about running GW as a business, with little concern for things like faculty remuneration (or retention), education of the students, or town-gown relations. I won't go so far as to say he was bad for the school ... but I will say that the benefits he brought the university were realized within the first few years of his tenure. I've been eagerly anticipating his departure for over ten years.
Okay, GWalum, you may have a point, but the FoBo residents seem to want to have it both ways. They've been pretty successful at getting the city to force GW to stick to the campus plan recently, but when GW proposes construction that plainly adheres to the plan, the residents oppose that, too. Their reasoning pretty much boils down to: "We will oppose anything GW tries to do, no matter how beneficial it is to both school and neighborhood."
How is the school going to be able to house a certain percentage of students in on-campus housing, as called for in the campus plan, without building more on-campus student housing?
I am also an alum. I have my own issues with GW overall, but really, most people who live right next to a major university hate it. I don't believe there is anything all that special about the FoBo/GW relationship, no matter how many petty little things someone sights. These things about in college towns.
I always thought that the faculty issues were the worst, but it was hard for me to lay blame all at SJT. "GWU Alumna" may have a better sense but then again may not. You cannot discount SJTs major accomplishments in turning the school into what it is today, and as SAT scores for incoming freshman continue to rise each year, it is hard for me to think that the last 10 have been all bad.
On a side note. The FoBos are nimby's. The only way to deal with nimby's if you aren't a nimby, is to not play fair. Sorry, but...Whereas 60% of nimby's may be reasonable people (and I am being EXTREMELY GENEROUS in that number) the other 40% are so nuts that the entire lot cannot be trusted to act rationally. Therefore anyone who might normally work with them is forced to work against them. It is sad, but true. SJT might have done things that were crappy, a lot of things, but it is hard for me to believe that anything would have gotten done if he hadn't been willing to "stick it to them."
I agree with katmere. Many city schools have the same issues GW has with its neighbors. Just as an example, Columbia in NYC wants to develop its neighborhood further and is running into opposition. People don't like change, even when it's for the better. I think many of you posters need to get a broader perspective in general. I think GW's main problem is that too many students and alum like to complain. They always feel they are getting "second-best" since they didn't get into Harvard or something. GW has many positive characteristics. Try to focus more on those strengths and if you don't like something, do something about it. Get involved in the GW community, volunteer, contribute.
There will continue to be new sources of conflict between GW and the surronding community so long as GW continues to expand into that community.
Katmere: I don't know about that 60/40 thing. I think what you're noticing is an artifact of the fact that it takes alot to get someone motivated enough to subsume their other day to day activities to some sort of community activist compulsion. In an area changing as quick as DC, there are many apparently unreasonable people who did not start out that way.
Susan makes some reasonable points, including the one about GW students and alums complaining because of a chip on their shoulder due to not getting "into Harvard or something". However, GW's absolute failure to focus on academics over the past 5-10 years, while instead focusing on real estate and expansion, is well-documented and worth focusing on. GW was on its way to becoming a top-tier academic institution, but got derailed when SJT and his cronies decided it made more business sense to focus on non-academic investments. Most of us chose GW for its positive attributes, and made the most of them, but that doesn't preclude us from working to make academics also a strength of the university. And it is embarrassing to see what little focus was put on that during the Trachtenberg years. Most of us who truly value universities as academic institutions applaud the appointment of a professor from a preeminent research institution as GW's next president.
Susan: with my gentleman's C's high-school average, I'll admit to being lucky to get into GW. Harvard "or something" was never an option.
Confession aside, your point side-steps my underlying critism, which is that GW willfully neglected to build loyalty among students or alum, or good will between itself and the surrounding community. Stepping back into the confession booth, I'll say the only time I hear from them is when they want $$. And, until Mary Cheh, the only time I read local news about GW is when they wanted to build. Maybe if, at least, they opened their libraries to the general public, or regularly held and broadly advertised open conferences, like JHU on Mass Ave does, they would appear to provide some larger social benefit. But no, their idea of providing a social benefit is to offer to fund a badly needed city school renovation in return for permission to violate their campus plan. Real classy.
Universities are supposed to add to society. Alma mater, and all. GW just doesn't seem to get that. Sorry if this comes off overly harsh. I am actually pleased, for the most part, with the edu GW offered me. I have to say, though, that I credit the people, more than the institution, for that.
What a good discussion! I do have a problem, however, with the continual assertion that everyone in Foggy Bottom hates GW. I also have a problem with those who have cited the Campus Plan and other recent development proposals as evidence that GW and its neighbors do not get along. If you are going to make such a claim, please be prepared to back it up. At each of the recent development hearings (GW Campus Plan, Old Hospital Site, and School Without Walls) before the DC Zoning board, community members in support of GW have FAR outweighed those in opposition. Literally hundreds of people have written letters or testified in support of the school's plans. While the opposition comes from the same handful of people who oppose anything and everything that involves change. And please don't take my word for this; the proceedings of the DC Zoning Board are public record. Could GW have been a better neighbor over the years? No doubt. But we need to realize that views of a few critics should not be used to make sweeping judgments.
It warms my heart to see GW students supporting their university in some way. But one must wonder what percentage of that portion of GW students who live in FB support this, and where those people will be, say, 1-4 years from now.