The recent announcement of the election of Andrea Chapdelaine PhD as the twelfth President of Connecticut College marked the official conclusion of a nearly year long selection process, in which nearly 100 candidates were considered for the position by selection and interview committees consisting of students, faculty, staff, and members of the Board of Trustees. Over the past two weeks, The College Voice has had the opportunity to speak with various members of the selection committees about why they got involved with the process, what their goals were, what they got out of it, and if they were happy with the process as a whole. Though committee members were not allowed to disclose information about the particulars of the process or the individual candidates for the presidency of the College due to signing nondisclosure agreements, committee members were cleared to speak about their feelings about the experience, and their reasons for getting involved.
Ashley Breyer ‘24, a member of the Sailing Team and a student who was involved with the committees agreed to speak about her experience with The College Voice. When asked about her reasons for signing up to be a member of the committee, she stated: “When I first heard about being a part of the presidential selection process I decided to apply because I saw it as an opportunity to contribute to the future of the college in a positive way. I have loved my time at Conn, and want to ensure that future students have a positive experience as well.”
Breyer also highlighted her desire to better understand the wants, needs, and goals of the student body, and prioritize that in her role within the committee. She highlighted this, stating “I hoped to gain a deeper understanding of what the student body wants in a President, and to learn how each candidate would approach these needs, and then choose a candidate based on how they planned to lead the school.”
When asked about whether she felt personally satisfied with the process, Breyer enthusiastically emphasized her experience as a positive one, highlighting her experience with the Connecticut College value of shared governance, how it contributed to this positive experience, and also highlighted her excitement about the results of the process. “Overall, I had a very positive experience as a Presidential Search Invited Interviewer. I got to meet a lot of really cool people throughout the whole process, and learn about what the student body wants to see in a President,” says Breyer. She then continues, stating that “personally, it was a valuable experience where I learned a lot, and felt like I made an impact [on Conn and the process]. I believe that Andrea Chapdelaine is a great fit for Conn, and will lead the College in a good direction. She is in tune with the needs of the College, and willing to put in the work.”
Maria Boyce ‘85 an alum of Connecticut College and a member on the Board of Trustees, was heavily involved in the Presidential Search Committees throughout the entire process, and recently took the time to speak with The College Voice about her experience. Boyce provided shared governance – and how it was brought into the spotlight throughout the Fanning Hall occupation of last spring – as a primary reason for her desire to be involved with the search process. She states that “I was excited to participate in a shared governance committee, and this committee really manifested shared governance. We were a committee of representatives of faculty, staff, the student body, and the Board… This was an important process because in the events of last spring there was some tension with respect to shared governance. I was hoping that we could right that ship. I was incredibly excited to participate in a process that was so important to the future of our college!”
When asked about her hopes going into the process, Boyce highlighted her desire to better understand what the community as a whole was looking for in a new President. She states “I was really hoping to – and did come to – understand the wants and needs of our community. An important part of the process happened at the beginning with a series of meetings and surveys of various community members on campus, alums, and parents asking them what their hopes for the future of Connecticut College was. That information was very valuable for me as a trustee in terms of understanding and framing what our community hopes for the candidates who we interview… We always tend to talk about end results but it is important to talk about the process, and this was almost a year long process. Information gathering was very important to where we ended up in the process.”
Similar to Breyer, when asked if she got what she wanted out of the process – both personally and for the College as a whole – Boyce’s answer was a resounding “yes.” Again similar to Breyer, she highlighted the importance and camaraderie within the committees that came out of the shared governance of the process. She also highlighted her excitement at the results of the process. Boyce states that “Personally I learned a great deal from my colleagues on the committee. I enjoyed getting to know them individually. They are all impressive and hard working people. We all rowed in the same direction, and all wanted what was best for Connecticut College. Bringing different perspectives together, hearing students, faculty, staff, and trustee perspectives all together was great. We got a great result, and President Capdelaine will be a wonderful leader for us going forward, and I’m really excited that she accepted our offer to be the twelfth President of Connecticut College. She has a deep knowledge of higher education, and I’m excited about her excitement for the Connecticut College community. She comes in ready from day one based on her experience and character.”
Boyce continued to elaborate on her experience on the process by contextualizing its importance with relation to last spring’s protests, highlighting those in charge of organizing the committee, and her pride with the work accomplished. “When we started the process we had some concern that knowing the challenges that we faced as an institution last spring, we wondered if people would want to apply to be President. In the end, we were overwhelmed with excellent applications” states Boyce. She continues, stating that “it was an important reminder that Conn is so much more than the events from last spring, and a reminder that our community is a forward looking community… We received almost one hundred applications from all over the United States. I just found great joy in working with colleagues, getting to know student representatives. I’d like to give a special commendation to Lauren Middleton, who is the Executive Assistant to the President. She was instrumental in bringing people together… I can’t say enough about the hard work that Lauren did behind the scenes to make everything run smoothly for us.”
Boyce wrapped up her points by once again highlighting her experience with shared governance, and her pride in the work that was accomplished: “I really appreciated participating in a process that exemplified the best of shared governance. Personally, I learned a great deal about the status of higher education in the United States beyond Connecticut College from reading applications and from talking with candidates who brought a variety of different perspectives in higher education. This is an important time for higher education in the United States. I learned a lot about how other schools operate, and am particularly excited about President Chapdelaine bringing that experience as a national leader to Conn… Overall I am just honored to have been a part of this process and really excited about being able to land a woman who I think will be a wonderful leader for us going forward, and I am so appreciative of the hard work of all of the committee members.”
Sarah Cardwell, the Senior Associate Dean of Student Life at the College, was a staff representative on the Presidential Search Committees. Dean Cardwell took the time recently to speak with The College Voice about her experience with the committees, and echoed many similar sentiments to Breyer and Boyce. On her reasoning for getting involved, Cardwell highlighted her experience during COVID-19 at Conn as something that inspired her. She stated that “During Covid when I was running the testing center I learned a lot about how the institution worked. I had the opportunity to interact with a lot of different people on campus who I normally don’t interact with. As a result of that experience, I felt like I had a really good understanding of how the school works, about the different challenges different groups of staff face. A lot of times we think about staff as one group of people, but it’s made up of lots of groups of people with different schedules and different needs. I wanted to try and represent all of those things.”
On her hopes in participating in the committee, Dean Cardwell highlighted her view of the search committees as another potential learning opportunity – similar to her experience in managing elements of the college during COVID-19 – and her excitement about being involved with such a high level search committee. Cardwell states that “I anticipated I would have an opportunity [in working as a member of the search committees] to work with people on campus that I don’t normally work with. To get to know people in a different way. I think that professionally it was a unique opportunity to learn about how presidential search processes work. I’ve been on search committees before, but not on this level.”
When asked about her goals for the process – both personally and more broadly for the college – Cardwell highlighted her hope to represent her group within the Connecticut College community, and highlighted how she felt her hopes were realized. “More than anything I wanted to represent my colleagues” states Cardwell. “I very much had the opportunity to do that. I feel like I said what needed to be said, felt heard, felt that Persephone Hall’s – the other staff representative – voice and my voice and thoughts and opinions about what is happening at Conn and how we move forward were paid attention to and that was what I was hoping to have happen.”
When asked how she would describe her overall experience, Cardwell emphasized the different perspectives she was able to understand because of the process, and that she had a very good experience as a member of the committee. She states that “It was definitely a positive experience, no question about that. I don’t know that there’s a single moment I can think of [to represent the process as a whole], but I would say that I brought to the table how I see the institution and the ways that I looked at the college. It was really interesting to be in a room that was full of faculty, staff, students, and board members who all see the institution through a different lens. I learned a lot, and I really enjoyed that. I thought about things in some ways that I hadn’t necessarily considered before.”
To punctuate her description of the experience of the Presidential Committees, Cardwell circled back to the familiar theme of shared governance, and how that value guided the process as a whole. “I would say that we are an institution that talks about valuing shared governance and having different voices in the conversation, and one of the things that I learned was that there are a lot of different ways that a presidential search can happen” states Cardwell. “We developed a process that worked for us and reflected our values, and that’s not necessarily how other presidential searches work. These are things that are important to our community from a process standpoint and we need to embody those values. An example of that I guess is when the idea of having an invited interviewer as part of the process. That is a little unusual in a presidential search process to extend beyond the search committee, but we thought it was important to do that and think creatively. I felt good that we created a process that reflected who Conn is.”
While Breyer, Boyce, and Cardwell are only three of the many members of the Connecticut College community who were involved with the Presidential Search Committees, and every member’s takeaways likely differ at least to some extent, the overarching positive experiences described, and the constant thread of shared governance highlighted by all three go to show that the search which resulted in President-elect Chapdelaine’s appointment was rooted in one of the most central values of Connecticut College.
