Provost's Annual Address to the Faculty
by Interim Provost Ivy E. Broder

"Our annual checkup: the healthy state of academic affairs"
April 26, 2006

There is an old Chinese saying that goes, "May you live in interesting times." It is a phrase rich in irony. I don't think it would be possible to begin this address without acknowledging the difficult period we have gone through this year. We had our distractions, to put it mildly. So much time and energy was expended by every constituency as we dealt with an enormous number of issues. And yet, as is often the case in times of crisis, I saw the campus pull together, move on, and continue to do what we have always done: teach our classes, advise students, write letters of recommendation, analyze datasets, finalize syllabi, sleep through committee meetings, referee work for professional journals, grade comps, interview candidates, design buildings and organize conferences.

The University's By-Laws, and the Faculty Manual, require that the provost address the faculty once a year. To be honest, this is not the talk that I thought I would be giving this year. You know that I had served as Dean of Faculties and then Dean of Academic Affairs for the past 12 years. So for about 11 years and 11 months, I had been fantasizing about my farewell speech as Dean. Since now I won't have the opportunity to give that speech, I hope you will indulge me just a few minutes to reflect on those dozen years.

I am very proud of what we accomplished during that time. And by we, I mean the faculty of the university working closely with the deans and administrators in academic affairs and the other vice presidents. I could probably spend the entire time allotted to me today reviewing our progress. But since that is not the purpose of this address, I'll tell you what stood out for me:

• The transformation of the faculty. Through a combination of growth and turnover, we hired a total of 999 new full-time faculty in 12 years. Four hundred of them are still here, including 200 in tenured or tenure track positions. So with a faculty of just over 600, that means almost 2/3 of the faculty are new in the past 12 years. But it is not only the quantity that matters here; it is the tremendous increase in the quality and diversity of the faculty that is stunning. We have faculty members who have come to us straight from graduate schools as well as those who have had successful careers as filmmakers, lawyers, journalists, diplomats, heads of NGOs and advocacy groups and maybe even a gladiator or two. People with a real passion for the intellectual life of the academy and for communicating that passion to others. And, if you look at the average number of faculty of color we hired in the early 1990s, compared to the past three years, it has increased by 30% a year, with the number of African American and Hispanic faculty increasing by 150%. The percentage of female faculty continues to grow dramatically as well. Here's an illustration of just how much times have changed. In 1993, fewer than ¼ of our tenured faculty were female. It is now 36%. Overall, there are 100 more women on the faculty than there were 12 years ago. The quality of our new faculty is judged by both input (such as years of teaching experience, ranking of graduate programs, professional experience prior to coming to AU) and output (teaching and scholarly, creative and professional accomplishments since they have been here). For example, 18 new colleagues joined us on tenure track this fall. Half of them received their terminal degrees from Ivy League institutions and others from Stanford, Maryland, UCLA, BC, etc. They have been recipients of their profession's most prestigious awards, they have come here with Rhodes Scholarships and Social Science Research Council Fellowships behind them, books already published by major university presses, dozens of articles published in refereed journals, held positions on the Council of Economic Advisory, Federal Communications Commission , National Gallery of Art, and won awards for their teaching. The support that our new colleagues receive (such as Junior Faculty Teaching Release, 4 course loads, more summer support) as well as the intellectual environment that their colleagues have created has enabled us to attract them to our campus. But there is also a cultural change that has been part of this transformation. We now reach only for the best rather than settle for the good enough. And that rising tide has had the predicted impact. Looking both externally and internally, we increased our standards for tenure dramatically. Those standards changed for both teaching and scholarly and creative activities, but have attracted many colleagues who meet and exceed those standards. This causes some of us old-timers to wonder if we would be able to make it today.
  
  
• Establishing the Center for Teaching Excellence. Those of you who were here 10 years ago may remember that the 1997 Strategic Plan called for the creation of a teaching and learning center. In the spring of 1998, we were so fortunate to have Jack Child serve as founding director and develop what we now call the CTE. We knew that to be successful, the Center needed to be directed by a respected faculty member, rather than bringing in an outside expert in educational pedagogy. Although Jack's main focus was on technology, he also worked with his assistant and other faculty members to develop an excellent series of brown bag lunches and other programs focused on teaching issues and techniques. Since then, because of the reorganization of our technology units, John Richardson has expanded the scope of the Center to include most of academic computing and the audio visual department, while at the same time paying increasing attention to mentoring junior faculty and providing pedagogical help. CTE is an integral part of our campus culture now. In fact, almost 90% of the faculty use Blackboard in their classes, probably the highest percent in the country. And the new tenure track faculty lunches that CTE co-sponsored with my office were not only great fun, but I believe they made an enormous difference in the way we integrated these colleagues into our university community.
  
  
• Third, the level of support for our most outstanding students who are getting better every year. Here I would point to a couple of things. One is the increase in the size and programming of the University Honors Program and the Office of Merit Awards in the Career Center. And second, the increasing support from the faculty, which takes many forms. While we know it is demanding work to inspire students in classrooms or laboratories, some of what we do puts an even greater burden upon us. We mentor students. We conduct joint research with them. We stage mock interviews. We read and edit fellowship applications. And, as our students have grown steadily in quality, this work has brought increasing gratification. We are the inspiration for these students to continue their formal education. And what outcomes have we gained?
  
  
  1. Being recognized by the Truman Foundation as a Truman Honors Institution this year. This is based on our recent record in the competition. Since 2000, AU has had 4 Truman Scholars and 12 national finalists. Over the years, AU has had a total of 11 Truman Scholars.
  2. Being the top school in the United States in terms of placement of both Boren Scholarship winners and Presidential Management Fellows is a record that is surely the envy of our peer institutions.
  3. The Marshall Foundation, the Fulbright Foundation, the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation, Goldwater Foundation, and many others have all supported our students with generous grants for study beyond the BA.
     
     
• Next, sponsored research. There has been an attitudinal shift and consequently higher level of activity in the Office of Sponsored Programs since its reorganization in 1999-2000. Thanks to the faculty and to the high quality of support of that unit when Liz Kirby took over as director, externally sponsored funding has increased at the university from $6.5 million in FY2000 to approximately $14 million in the past three years. But even more stunning is the change in volume this year. With only three days left before the end of this fiscal year, you have secured $18.5 million dollars. The math is easy; this is almost a tripling of external funding in six years. I read some very interesting proposals over the years. Of course, it is critical that we continue to get more faculty involved in applying for external funding, regardless of their field.
  
  
• Within the last decade, we have decentralized the awarding of graduate financial aid. Where previously all honor awards were determined by a central university-wide committee, we reconfigured funding and, along with an increase in stipends over time and a recent new infusion of almost $2 million in additional funds, our graduate award packages are extremely competitive with those of other doctoral programs. And in fact, the incoming credentials of our students have been improving. Over the past decade, the GPAs of our doctoral students have risen from an average of about 3.3 to almost 3.6. At the same time, our yield rate in some of our best programs is increasing. For example, in the School of Public Affairs, two years ago the yield rate for doctoral students receiving merit awards was 30%. This year it is 70%. For our masters students, we have seen similar quality increases. I know that many on the faculty would like to see more changes (and more money of course). Next year, I hope that we will be able to do some further benchmarking on graduate financial aid policies to keep us competitive for the best students.

But I would have to say that the single high point of those dozen years as dean came when John Douglass called me one afternoon about four years ago and said that the newly reconstituted Faculty Senate would like me to take a place at the table along with the other senators and the provost. This was the kind of reinforcement that every administrator hopes for. I was truly touched by that invitation and everything that it represented.

And so the picture I see now at AU and the one that we have to communicate to everyone on the outside, is that we are an incredibly strong institution, one that cares deeply about its students, a place where knowledge and artistic creation coexist with engagement with the community and the world. And with that in mind, I'd like to turn to the next section of my address, which is not an address to the faculty at AU but rather an open message to Derek Bok. Yes, Derek Bok, the former and incoming Interim President at Harvard University…a reminder to everyone that AU was not the only institution with a difficult presidential transition this year.

Why do I want to send a message to Derek Bok? Because just a few months ago, he wrote an article for the Chronicle of Higher Education titled "The Critical Role of Trustees in Enhancing Student learning." In it, he declared that shared governance is a system that generally works well, when the trustees concentrate on the overall mission of the institution and on questions of finance, physical planning, fundraising and the hiring and firing of presidents. Faculty concentrate on academic matters, including the curriculum, teaching and hiring and promotion decisions. Although he doesn't use this term, he is arguing that with this distribution of labor, each group uses its comparative advantage. That claim can be the subject of a different debate. But Bok then asserts that the system cannot deal with one problem: "ensuring the highest possible quality of education." Frankly, I found that assertion to be astonishing…that is, astonishingly wrong in the case of AU. He then presents seven questions that a board should ask the president about assessing teaching and developing better ways to educate students. So here are my proud responses to Derek Bok about how this works at AU.

1. Does the college participate in the National Survey of Student Engagement? Yes. And on almost every item measuring academic rigor, AU outscored other doctoral institutions. We also led our peer group in measures of active learning, quality of coursework as well as including diverse perspectives in the educational process.
   
   
2. What efforts does the college make to assess student progress towards generally accepted goals such as critical thinking, quantitative skills, writing, etc? Our general education program has been doing such assessment for many years, from tracking learning objectives on the Student Evaluation of Teaching as well as a careful review of the syllabi with the faculty coordinator to be sure that the goals are met.
   
   
3. Are the results of such assessments shared with the faculty and are they used to identify weaknesses and discuss potential remedies? Our Learning Outcomes and Assessment Project Team has been working hard with faculty across the university to do exactly this for both graduate and undergraduate programs. Some examples:
   
   
   • The Dept of Language and Foreign Studies assessed how well students developed oral communication skills by conducting interviews of their students and seeing where their students place on a nationally-recognized continuum of oral proficiency. It led to more emphasis on oral skills for their students.
   • For the Studio Art program, a faculty panel reviewed the oral and written defenses and presentations of its upper level undergraduates. They also had students assess their own work. Comparing the views of faculty and students helped the faculty better understand the strengths of the program as well as recognize which areas needed more attention.
     
     
4. Are funds available to enable instructors to experiment with new teaching methods, and are the results evaluated and publicized within the faculty? Yes, we have annual awards for curriculum development and software acquisition. Those receiving funding then make presentations to the faculty at the Ann Ferren Teaching Conference (AFTC).
   
   
5. Is training in classroom teaching given to new faculty members? Yes, through our first and second year mentoring of new tenure track faculty, the Greenberg Seminar for our doctoral students who teach, the annual AFTC and the individual consultation sessions that are given by CTE.
   
   
6. What use does the college make of teaching evaluations and how well are those surveys constructed? Besides the obvious answer that they are used in personnel decisions, we know that the narrative responses especially are used to help faculty improve their pedagogy. They are also used for program assessment, hopefully even more so in the future after the extensive reevaluation and redesign. I will talk some more about this bottom up exercise later.
   
   
7. What evidence of a candidate's teaching is collected in reviewing professors for appointment or promotion? Having just read yet another round of tenure and promotion files, I can certainly attest to the completeness of the teaching section of tenure and promotion portfolios. I have always found among the most interesting parts of these files, the introductory narrative on teaching.
   

And so, Mr. Bok, I think Harvard and many other institutions have a lot to learn from AU. And for the trustees listening, I just took one big job off your plate.

What I just described is simply one dimension of our work. And in these aspects, I was describing more about process than outcomes. So now I would like to turn to just that, the concrete accomplishments achieved and milestones passed recently. In the past, we have used one strategic plan or another to be the structure or checklist for our achievements. I am not going there. I think it is clear at this time, which of the 15 points have been achieved and which few, upon reflection, have proved unnecessary or unrealistic. We have certainly set the stage for a new strategic plan going forward. Rather, I will review our recent faculty accomplishments, new program initiatives and developments, and other university-wide academic activities.

I think it is clear that we've accomplished a great deal this year, despite the distractions. Certainly a positive by-product of the difficulties we had with the issues surrounding the former president is the relationship that has developed between members of the Board of Trustees and the faculty and deans. Instead of being a rather anonymous group, known to relatively few on campus, for better or worse, the members of the board are now household names. There has been more interaction with the faculty and the board in the past year than in any time in recent history. The board is listening to the community in areas of governance and trusteeship, asking probing questions about our programs, attending campus events and getting to know us all at a level we would never have guessed only a year ago. In fact trustees are here with us now. I would like to acknowledge the presence of Jack Cassell. I believe this is the first time in the recent history of the university that a trustee has attended the Provost's Annual address. And so whatever is ultimately adopted by the Board, the past year has demonstrated the importance of faculty participation in the governance of the institution.

Faculty Scholarship:

The results are in for this year! As you all know, we compile data on faculty scholarship, creative activities and professional service using our on-line annual report system. In 2005, you wrote 78 books, monographs and government reports, 116 book chapters and refereed conference proceedings, 135 refereed journal articles, 20 poems, stories, plays or exhibitions, served on 143 editorial boards and 36 juries or award selection committees and your work appeared in 95 performances and exhibitions, from inside the beltway to across the US to as far away as Egypt, Italy, and the Caribbean. Your advice and expertise is sought all over the world. You continue to be held in high regard by peers in your discipline, even when you may not be aware of it.

And also in the area of faculty scholarship, I have an important announcement to make today. Some of you may have wondered whatever happened to that part of Point 7 of the Strategic Plan, which called for establishing a Presidential Fellowship for faculty whose work consistently conveys truly significant new insights and appears in influential publications. This spring, Acting Dean of Academic Affairs, Haig Mardirosian, convened a committee to develop guidelines for the competition. A faculty group recently met to review 11 proposals. I am very pleased to announce the names of the first Presidential Fellows. Richard McCann, of the Department of Literature, will supplement the Guggenheim Fellowship he was recently awarded and Leslie Gill, of the Department of Anthropology, will use hers to support field work in Colombia. Richard and Leslie, please stand. Let us all congratulate our two colleagues for this recognition of their scholarly and creative work, past and future.

Next to our Academic Programs:

Most significant was the first pilot of the University College. This past fall, 150 new freshmen participated along with 8 of our most outstanding faculty, including a recent Scholar Teacher of the Year. We offered at least one section in each of the five areas of the General Education Program. Each section had a student program associate who helped fellow students with the course and provided additional mentoring. Students lived together in neighborhoods in the residence halls, along with their PAs, clustered by the section in which they were enrolled.

After participating either in Discover DC or the Freshman Service Experience, students used DC extensively during the fall. These new freshmen conducted research at the Library of Congress and the National Library of Medicine, met with representatives from the Supreme Court and U.S. Senate, attended embassy press briefings, and toured the National Gallery of Art, and the National Museum of Broadcasting . But perhaps the highlight of the semester was the interdisciplinary seminar in which all faculty and students participated. Everyone attended a performance of Othello at the Shakespeare Theater. Then each class discussed an aspect of the play that related to their particular course. A week later there was a symposium with a faculty panel and specific questions about the play were analyzed, summarized by students with a focus on race, class, culture, power and gender.

We have completed an assessment of the program, giving us considerable feedback on its strengths and ways to improve it for this coming fall with a slight expansion of sections (to 10). Half the faculty will return to teach a second year; another half will be new to the University College. This year we will try to get a broader cross section of students before we decide whether and how to incorporate the program into the curriculum. I am very grateful to all of the members of the original project team, the Campus Life staff who faced considerable challenges in integrating the program in the residence halls, and of course the faculty, who were willing to experiment with new formats and who spent considerable time in the planning of the pilot, and working with students outside the classroom.

I believe that we have been successful in revitalizing our summer programming to a large extent because of the Distance Education program. Thanks to an effort led by Vi Ettle, summer distance education courses have gone from 1 course in 2003, to 24 courses planned for this summer. Through annual assessments, we have learned more about what types of courses are more successful and have honed the training program for faculty, now given by CTE.

Several years ago we embarked on a distance education project with some lofty ambitions, when distance education was beginning to be all the rage. This did not work for us for a variety of reasons. We have learned to go slowly, carefully and with just a few courses relative to the size of our entire curriculum. We continue to feel our way through the terrain. I realize that there will be, probably in the near future, a limited number of programs where distance education courses or at least hybrids of face-to-face and distance education will be on the increase. This is certainly a trend in executive based graduate education. And it allows us to enrich our courses and our programming with linkages around the country and around the world. However, I am convinced that especially for our undergraduate students, nothing will substitute for the in-class setting, the spontaneity of the classroom experience, the networking and the public speaking, not to mention the sound of chalk squeaking against the blackboard.

At the other extreme, so to speak, we go from a set of courses where the faculty and students never meet face-to-face to a set of courses where the faculty and students are together almost 24/7. We've learned a lot about our students' experiences during these programs. This academic year and summer we have 27 programs with a travel component, most of them international.

Along those lines, this academic year, we also made great strides in our goal towards increasing the number of students who go abroad. We have increased the number of sites dramatically, mostly through direct enroll programs at universities around the world. And because of our agreements with those institutions, our students can now use their AU financial aid. We have also imposed a fee on permits to study abroad at non-AU programs. These last two changes make it more attractive financially for students to stay with AU programs. So this combination of factors has lead to an increase of more than 40% in students attending AU Abroad programs over the past few years, with well over 800 students a year going abroad for at least one semester. Going forward we will be working to better understand the experiences of students in the direct exchange programs, including their cultural immersion experiences and their academic experiences.

And now, I turn away from specific academic programs to university-wide accomplishments and activities, and there are many. First I'd like to review some of the ways that AU has been recognized externally in the past year.

In the fall we all anxiously await the US News rankings, although as we like to say, they don't really matter. When they were published last fall, the fact that we were ranked as the 85 th university in the country received a lot of coverage across the campus. I know that we have increased in those rankings quite a bit in the past few years, but frankly I am very disappointed in where we placed. I know that the reality of our university, the faculty, the students, the programs, is far better than the perception in the academic marketplace. This reality was confirmed last fall when we received the exit report of Noel-Levitz, one of the most widely respected educational consultants. Although it may sound crass to some, we need to do a significantly better job projecting the university's strengths so that the academic reputation of AU is properly recognized. To that end, Neil Kerwin has put together two important university wide project teams: one for the Web and one for communications. I know these reputational changes cannot take place overnight and that every university is jockeying for position. But for AU, I know that our outstanding faculty, students and programs are among the very top tier in the country. It is just a matter of how we let people know about it.

Some folks out there do know about it: we received lots of good news just this year from many different reviews. Both Princeton Review and Fiske Guide named us as best value colleges. US News and World Report increased the overall ranking of the law school from 47 th to 43 rd, rated our clinical program as 2nd in the country, our international law program as 7 th in the country, and our trial advocacy program as 11 th in the country. But what makes Dean Grossman and the rest of us most proud is our ranking as the 20 th most diverse law school in America, with only five other institutions in the top tier ahead of us in that area. And in a new review in Foreign Policy Magazine, SIS was ranked 8 th in the country for preparing future foreign policy professionals and 25 th for academic careers. The American Psychological Association gave our doctoral program in clinical psychology an outstanding review during its accreditation study this year. And AU ranked #37 in 2005 among Division I Schools in the National Collegiate Scouting Association's "power rankings," based on academic excellence, the strengths of the athletic department, and our student-athlete graduation rates.

The physical manifestation of our academic excellence was highlighted by the Opening of the Katzen Center. It has truly transformed not only the arts programs but the entire campus since it was open to the public in July. Eleven academic programs are housed here, 240 courses have been taught, and 29 full-time faculty members have their offices here as well as many adjuncts and our graduate student studios. In addition to the wonderful celebration in October when we honored the donors, Cy and Myrtle Katzen, for their generosity to the university, there have been more than 50 performances or exhibitions, many university events, including the Ann Ferren Teaching Conference, and over 15,000 people have visited the museum, guided by 50 volunteers. We are now faced with the exciting challenge of making the arts programs recognized as the very best in the DC area, if not among the best in the country, reflecting the state of the art facilities and the world class faculty. This will require the work of all of us as we act as ambassadors for this outstanding set of programs.

And while I am on the subject of facilities, I would like to briefly review the status of a few other projects that will be of critical importance to our academic programs. We are making progress on our ambitious plans for a brand new building for the School of International Service. Earlier this year, the DC Zoning Board gave AU approval for the project. We have had to do some significant redesigns in the past few months. The architects have been working closely with our staff in facilities and SIS to develop a final plan that fits the needs of the academic program, comes in at the targeted budget amount and is a certified green building, which will look something like this (picture shown). Dean Goodman continues his fundraising activities at a breathless rate. If any of you know of some deep pockets out there who are interested in naming a building, he would welcome all suggestions.

At the same time, Dean Kirkman is working with the newly selected architects on a plan to turn the McKinley building into a home for the School of Communication. This is going to be a fabulous space for the exciting programs that the school offers. I'll bet that few of you in this room have been to the space under the dome of McKinley. I walked through it earlier this year and I can tell you, it is spectacular.

Because of Bob and Arlene Kogod's commitment to AU and the School of Business, the former new lecture hall will become an addition to the existing building. It is proceeding on track, with final design plans being developed now with construction to begin next year.

The completion of these building projects, combined with the recent renovations for WCL, CAS and SPA, will mean that each of our schools and colleges will have the academic space they deserve.

This fall, we celebrated the acquisition of the one millionth volume for the University Library. And while I am speaking of the library, let me also make note that we are all grateful to Diana Vogelsong and other members of the library team for stepping into the leadership roles after Pat Wand's departure. They are doing more than just keeping pace. The library has begun to put together its next five year strategic plan. They have a draft that was developed with input from faculty and student views, and they will now begin to engage the larger community in the process. This is very important for the institution right now. We all know that the nature, function and use of university libraries are rapidly changing. When I initiate a search for a new university librarian this fall, it is critical that the campus agree on a direction in order to attract the right person to the campus.

I'd like to mention a couple of other working groups that have been wrestling some critical challenges with significance across the entire campus.

Last fall, I formed a Retention Working Group because it has been more than ten years since the university examined this key issue. A committee, most ably led by Meg Weekes, has spent the semester collecting data, identifying gaps in our information systems, and reviewing information from financial aid, student life and various academic programs such as the University College and Honors. In developing its recommendations, the committee will rely on what it considers to be the university's most important asset in retaining students--the faculty. There will be specific suggestions for ways that faculty can help in supporting student success, as well as organizational changes at the university that might promote better results.

Finally, after at least three years of discussion and deliberation, Lyn Stallings and her committee led us through a major revision of the Student Evaluation of Teaching. It had been more than twenty years since the last revision. And I know that there has been a lot of dissatisfaction with the old form and whether students took the survey seriously. I know that many of you get annoyed when our students write frivolous comments on these forms. I think the new form is a greatly improved instrument that will allow us to get much more reliable and substantive feedback on our courses and our teaching. I want to compliment everyone involved in this project, especially the committee, but all of the deans, faculty and students who reviewed and discussed the revisions, for their very thoughtful input.

Well, I hope you share with me the conclusion that indeed, the annual examination reveals a strong, healthy academic corpus. But this assessment, based on all of this year's accomplishments and honors, scholarships and publications, poems and fellowships will be short lived if not part of a continuing culture of excellence, growth, and rejuvenation. Otherwise, that turnover in faculty, the measurement of our students, the publications, and awards will remain but a dry, useless dataset. With each passing year, our challenges continue to grow. To keep ourselves fit requires constant attention to our environment and to our own systems. We face fierce competition from the best institutions in the country for excellent students and faculty. We must continue to develop new and refine existing academic programs to attract the best and brightest students to our campus. In the past two academic years, we either substantially revised or created 16 new degrees, certificates, or minors while terminating two. We have the flexibility as a private institution to do this. We must be sure that we have the determination to continuously assess and reexamine our programs. Furthermore, our academic reputation is strong and can remain robust only as long as faculty scholarship, creative and professional activities continue to be subject to the rigorous scrutiny of the peer review process of the most influential journals and prestigious venues. These successes, especially for our graduate programs, are contingent on our ongoing efforts to secure external support for our work. The test is to see how many Trumans we win in the next half decade, how many more Ford Foundation grants we receive, which NSF panels we serve on, which university presses bear our name. We must be self conscious about it, determine that the path we take must reflect not only where we want to be, but who we are and where we have been.

I'd like to thank you all for being here today. Serving you as dean of academic affairs and as interim provost has been a privilege. During this speech I described so many achievements of our faculty and students, this year and over time. But like the proverbial tree that falls in the forest, these accomplishments have no meaning unless they have an impact on the lives of others. I began this afternoon by reflecting on a personal experience and I will end that way as well. In two and a half weeks, my beloved daughter Alana Morrall will walk across the stage at graduation and receive her master's degree. When she does, it will be my proudest moment in 31 years at American University, but not only because I will have a child with an advanced degree and will cheer for her accomplishments. It is also because I have been able to see from this personal perspective the outstanding work of my colleagues in three different schools at AU where she took courses. I have witnessed first hand the direct causal effect of your carefully crafted assignments, the thought-provoking classroom environments that you have created, your professional expertise and your mentoring on the maturation, confidence and professional development of one young woman. She said to me last week that the education she got at AU was the most important experience in her life (and she went to the finest private schools and a top tier university). Well, I know she is not an isolated example. And it helped me understand all the more clearly that our classrooms and residence halls are filled with someone's sons and daughters. Our obligation to guide and inspire is not only to our students but also to their families. Our influence over all their lives is evident when we look out over the sea of faces at graduation. This year, being both provost and parent, is a singular experience that I would not give up for anything.

Thank you so much for being here today and please join us for the reception.