Con(n)flicting Interests: Conn’s Presidential Search

Courtesy of Robbie Lynch ’24

Since last spring’s campus protests resulted in Katherine Bergeron’s resignation, Connecticut College has been on the hunt for a new president. Board of Trustees member Leslie Wong serves as interim president in the meantime. The Presidential Search Committee currently consists of four faculty members, two staff members, two students, and seven trustees, but will expand to include 18 more members (six students, six faculty members, and six staff members) for the interview process. WittKieffer is the professional firm hired by the College to lead the presidential search, despite faculty pleas asking Conn to refrain from hiring an external search firm.

Conn recently published its President Leadership Profile, a 16-page document created by the Presidential Search Committee, to advertise the College and outline the presidential position. Littered with typos, inconsistent italicization, and run-on sentences, the strength of this official document is diluted. The profile describes Conn as a “top liberal arts college,” highlighting the distinguished Connections curriculum, the Building on Strength strategic plan, and the Defy Boundaries campaign. According to the document, “[T]he College has been attracting stronger and more diverse cohorts of students every year, seeing the largest number of applications in its history with the Class of 2027.” While it was exciting that Conn had a record number of applicants, the campus is currently overcrowded, with students living in forced triples and quads, struggling to take the classes they want, and waiting for dinner in lines that wrap around Harris Refectory. Students wish to see a new college president who is committed to improving quality of life on campus: “There should be greater investment in the overall student experience, from improved resources for accessibility to better funding for food services to dorm improvements (i.e. mold issues),” wrote an anonymous student from the Class of 2025.

The Leadership Profile acknowledges, “To continue to fully realize its leadership position as an outstanding liberal arts college, Conn needs (equally) outstanding physical facilities and operational systems.” As Conn is a residential college, dorm life is a significant part of the student experience. Students require comfortable living quarters in order to focus on their studies. The currently overcrowded dorms–with mold, bug infestations, malfunctioning laundry machines, and outdated heating systems–make life difficult for many students. Ian Rawlings ‘25 expressed, “I find it sad yet almost funny that the last time a new dorm was built on campus was before humanity landed on the moon.” Conn’s Campus Master Plan does include a proposal to build a new residence hall, but that is clearly not a priority for the College compared with the (arguably nonurgent) renovations of Palmer Auditorium and the College Center at Crozier-Williams, neither of which house students. 

Notably, almost every photo in the Leadership Profile includes at least one person of color, although less than a quarter of Conn’s student population is made up of domestic students of color. This tokenization is not unusual for Conn, or any predominantly white institution. It is no question that Conn students place a high value on equity and inclusion; last spring’s protests demanded support for marginalized students on campus. On this topic, Nicole Sanfilippo ‘27 shared, “Given the [College’s] track record of lack of DEI, I think the highest concern [in choosing a new president] should be a record of commitment to such.” Not only is it important that the new president exhibit commitment to equity and inclusion, but they must have the courage to take real risks for the sake of marginalized students. “Commitment to DEI is a necessity in a new president, but that commitment has to translate into action. I’m tired of administration professing a commitment to equity while making excuses about not providing it,” wrote an anonymous student from the Class of 2025.

The profile’s “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” page broadly states the College’s goal to foster an inclusive community and promote full participation. The Search Committee explains, “The plan serves as a living document that responds to the changing needs of our community. Therefore, in solidarity with the global Black Lives Matter movement, the plan was updated in June 2020 to include a new set of goals specifically focused on antiracist education and action.” This strangely specific statement includes the only explicit mention of race in the entire document. Even the DEI page does not use the words “race,” “ethnicity,” “gender,” or “sexuality.” The College seems to shy away from using precise language and directly addressing the demands of students. For instance, Interim President Leslie Wong did not use the word “terrorism” to describe Hamas’s attack on Israel until his second written statement to the College community. Ben Rothstein ‘24 hopes, “When [the search committee] choose[s] the next President of Connecticut College, I urge [them] not to forget Conn’s large and vibrant Jewish community, and to pick someone who is capable of showing empathy and support to all students.” The fact that the Leadership Profile fails to even name various identities does not bode well for the selection process. Moreover, Rawlings noted, “In both the DEI section and infrastructure section [of the profile] there is no mention of the inaccessibility plaguing this campus, making these claims to inclusivity and improvement ring hollow.”

The Presidential Search Committee wishes for the new president to be “a strategic leader,” “a visionary,” “a champion for Conn’s administrators, faculty, staff, and students,” “an enthusiastic friend-raiser and ambitious fundraiser,” “an advocate [regarding DIEI],” “a proponent of sustainability,” “a transparent and inclusive listener,” and “an adept manager.” These words sound powerful, but only time will tell whether the new president embodies these characteristics and puts them into action. All fifteen Conn students who responded to my survey indicated that commitment to shared governance and receptiveness to student/faculty/staff feedback is one of the most important factors in a college president. This result aligns with the exigence of the Occupy CC movement– Bergeron’s failure to heed former Dean of Institutional Equity and Inclusion Rodmon King’s advice. Commitment to equity and inclusion, ability to represent the College, and innovation also emerged as vital attributes in the student survey. 

When asked to rank their confidence in the College’s and search firm’s ability to select a president who will be well-received by the Conn community and bring about positive change, all respondents chose “2” or “3” on the scale of 0-5 (“0” meaning not at all confident and “5” meaning completely confident). It is not surprising that students are skeptical of the presidential search process. Last semester’s campus protests were a period of extreme student involvement and authority. The student body advocated for and achieved real progress at Conn’s administrative level. At an open meeting, students were able to express their frustrations directly to the Board of Trustees. Now, students once again feel excluded from administrative processes and decisions; there is a looming fear of returning to where we started before the protests. It is vital that the presidential search process be transparent and inclusive of student voices. Student input and true shared governance must remain part of the culture at Conn.