His appointment is the capstone of prior successes as director of the National Science Foundation, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and, most recently, as chancellor of the university's San Diego campus.
Atkinson assumes leadership of nine strong, viable university campuses--he himself helped make San Diego a rival of Berkeley and UCLA. However clumsy recent performances of the UC Board of Regents and the university's central office may have been, the quality of the university itself is not in question. Change is needed, not because the university campuses are failing institutions of learning, but because the continuation of their excellence is in jeopardy.
This situation poses seven almost unprecedented challenges for the new president.
First, the central staff. To accomplish virtually any agenda, the new president must take control of the university's large, central bureaucracy. Too many of the central office staff spend too much time and energy justifying the status quo and rationalizing past practices. They should be seeking alternative solutions and innovative options for a dramatically different future. Atkinson, the regents, and the campuses deserve a more effective central staff, one smaller in number and more appropriately focused.
Second, the Board of Regents. Atkinson can hardly be elated by the prospect of working with a board that muffed the original presidential search, and rushed to a decision on affirmative action. As with the central staff, the challenge will be to strengthen the board by focusing its deliberations on the choices that will shape the future of the university. The regents deserve the best advice and counsel that can be given. It is preposterous that, in recent years, major proposals have been presented to them without explicit examination of policy alternatives.
Third, the balance between research and teaching. Atkinson has urged, eloquently and perceptively, that the credibility of a university's research mission may depend on reforming undergraduate teaching. The challenge is to gain faculty acceptance of restored equilibrium between teaching and research, and of closer relationships with the public schools, and to do so while maintaining research excellence and enhancing the quality of instruction.
Fourth, preserving college opportunity. For all California higher education, the major challenge of the next decade will be accommodating some 480,000 additional students. In the face of uncertain state revenues, all public institutions must do more with less. They must learn to value productivity--not denigrate it. The university's share will be about 29,000 additional students, and its task will be difficult: It must preserve both research and instructional excellence. Atkinson's public statement that higher education is "what's made a difference" in his life is a reminder to all of the obligation to assure the same opportunity to the next generations of Californians.
Fifth, research. Current plans for a new research campus in the Central Valley should be reexamined. The continuing excellence of the university research programs could be compromised by another research campus. California does need world-class research programs in all major disciplines. But the measure is quality, not quantity, and we agree with the President's Advisory Council on Science and Technology--proliferation and duplication of research facilities are a serious threat to research preeminence of American universities.
Sixth, the public schools. The challenge here is improving the broad base of public education on which the university rests. Atkinson has long expressed concern about the adequacy of scientific and technological education in the public schools, urging research professors to devote a modicum of time to teacher training and K-12 curricula. Greater cooperation of the university with the public schools and community colleges is not merely desirable; it is essential.
Seventh, and finally, the presidential constituencies. Assuredly, the major concerns of any university president are the faculty and students. But looking only inward to the needs and convenience of these current constituencies can work an injustice on those who will come after them, and perhaps to the legitimate needs of the state and the people of California.
At the peak of his career, Atkinson is now also at the peak of an enormously large, complex and cumbersome organization. His national stature places him in a better position than others to take the risks that leadership demands in preparing the university for the next century. His view from the peak will be broader and longer than that in San Diego. He must look beyond the university's organizational boundaries, and farther than the next year's budget. He must be a statesman as well as an administrator.