College leadership: Learning from experience

People interested in issues affecting higher education listen closely to college presidents. Perhaps this is because in times of crisis or concern many recognize that presidents occupy strategic positions from which to interpret and articulate information about the academy. This may be why the presidency carries an aura of credibility (Flawn, 1990).

As with most aspects of higher education, the presidency has been through a slow historical evolution (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997). The history of higher education in America has seen the college presidency move from an instructional and basic administrative role, most often held by clergymen, to an extensive position as chief executive officer of the institution. The former tended to be a weaker post as compared to the more potent modern presidential offices (Birnbaum, 1999). Early presidential power was not so much a function of personal character as it was a function of the degree of board, faculty or state control. During the 19th century, as scholarship began to outweigh clerical credentials in the academy, presidents emerged through the faculty ranks and were regarded as primus inter pares (Brubacher & Rudy, 1997). It was at this time that notable educational leaders such as Daniel Coit Gilman and Charles Eliot transformed the college presidency into a distinguished and powerful office. Today, the American college presidency has been elevated to great importance by tradition, formal title, institutional by-laws, and symbolism (Balderston, 1995).