The resignation of Boston College President Rev. William P. Leahy, S.J., tasks the University with finding a new leader for the first time in almost 30 years. However, the Board of Trustees made sure to swiftly indicate that it is likely to select another Jesuit to fill the role.
As Jesuit universities move away from Jesuit presidents, such a successor could be qualified for and effectively fill the role, but it is far too early to make such a statement and limitation, and The Heights rightly beat me in making that point.
Additionally, the statement from the University and Board indicated only a subset of the Board would be involved in the evaluation process, not even the full Board, which itself is arguably unrepresentative of the BC community anyway.
While UGBC is expected to be consulted, a process that includes students, faculty, and the surrounding communities must be described clearly. Including students in this process is a best practice and universities that did not have experienced several consequences as a result.
BC has notably diverged from other Jesuit universities and the broader Catholic Church in recent years. The University has shut down student voices for decades and spurned the community time and time again.
It would behoove the Trustees to read The Heights and to understand the issues facing the University beyond fundraising. It would behoove the Trustees to engage with students beyond just a passing conversation or two with UGBC.
A student referendum on the selection of BC’s new president would empower a new leader and help them gain support from the student body. An unvetted and unpopular candidate would only widen the divide between student voices and administrative decision-making.
Leahy himself has garnered a reputation for his absence around campus, with students texting and posting when they see him due to its rarity. A university president with some sense of student approval would be a major improvement to the status quo.
While recent events on campuses across the country have caused many presidents and trustees to close themselves off, it is necessary for all of them to take the time to look inward and conceive of new ways to bridge divides and engage in conversation. The selection of a new president only bolsters the need to turn away from insular thinking.
Additionally, the less “open” a presidential search is, the higher the likelihood for an abrupt presidential resignation. Therefore, if the trustees enjoyed Leahy’s legacy and lengthy tenure, it would still be in their best interest to avoid a “closed” search.
As radical as some of my ideas may seem for Boston College, they are not unprecedented or without instances of success elsewhere. The risks of failure are also not unique to BC, but we should pride ourselves on the additional obligations and morals perhaps not held by our peers.
I myself have faced my fair share of threats and consequences for trying to get the University to better fulfill its Jesuit, Catholic mission. Yet, I have seen positive change on our campus too, and I hope that the Board takes this opportunity to make BC stronger rather than running from change as it has in the past.
With BC’s reputation on the rise, even more can be done to foster an inclusive, open campus with a community that respects its leader as someone willing to engage students, not just the largest of donors.
Yes, Leahy oversaw and, in some cases, created impressive innovations at BC. As a proud attendee of Agape Latte and having engaged in the work of the Church in the 21st Century Center though, I recognize that he was not the sole contributor. Incredible people like Karen Kiefer and others have led at this school. Relatedly, some in Leahy’s orbit who have been here over the same period oversaw and were a part of awful things.
I once held a peaceful protest regarding climate change and was told by multiple administrators that I would face academic probation. I had classmates who wrote “climate change is real” in washable chalk on sidewalks be detained for hours by the Boston College Police Department.
I have watched the Pope call to divest from fossil fuels. I have watched him endorse same-sex civil unions. I have watched him call for the necessity of labor unions. All for BC to say no, no, and no, and actively repress those who raise such issues. All under Leahy’s leadership and direction.
Many students of color, queer students, women, and countless student advocates—myself included—have faced greater marginalization on our campus than out in the real world. That is concerning. As other universities celebrate or even provide materials for protest, BC shuts dissent down.
Introducing additional or more complex structures will not solve all of our problems, but better governance should beget better outcomes. Greater inclusion of voices—simply having a seat at the table—reduces marginalization, even if only slightly.
BC’s trustees do not currently publish minutes of their meetings and have been known to meet off campus or in other cities like New York to be away from students. Further, there is no indication of efforts taken regarding the diversity of the trustees themselves.
We can do better, and I trust we will. Leahy may leave, but administrators remain on our campus who have said to me “Climate change is not and will never be a priority at this University.” Trustees remain who are completely allied with Leahy.
The Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities, the USA East Province of Jesuits, St. Ignatius Parish, and of course students, faculty, and the larger community must seek to make BC an even greater university, and I hope that they are given such an opportunity. It is incumbent on trustees and administrators to make that space and, further, on alumni like me to use our leverage—financial and otherwise—to get them to do the right thing.
In addition to The Heights’ call for a broad search beyond only Jesuits and for a president committed to transparency, I call for a concrete process of inclusion in the search with in-person and virtual forums for feedback from all stakeholders. I further call for this process to occur in conjunction with strengthened governance structures for students and faculty with two of each being elected to the Board of Trustees and the ability for students and faculty to give a vote of assent on an ultimate selection. These moves will foster inclusion and transparency and help BC on its journey to being an even greater and more recognized international university because we do already have incredible leaders on our campus – they just need an opportunity to speak.
The inevitable critics who claim this is “too much work” or will not bring about the value described have no understanding of a university’s role in our community and society nor its effect on individuals, and as a result, have no business being involved in university affairs.
