12-15-2007, 03:32 PM | #26 | ||
Charon
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo)
Posts: 9,564
|
Quote:
Quote:
I am firmly on record as being against the GA-as-president trend. But I think you are overstating the damage a bit. Both Oaks and Holland went on to become GA's. Not just GA's, but apostles. Do you really think they were that much different before they were GA's, i.e, while they were presidents at BYU? Of course, the GA's will have more of a mandate to lead in a certain way, but let's not kid ourselves. Previous presidents did what the board of trustees wanted. To me, the biggest disadvantage of the GA-as-president trend is that it severely restricts the candidate pool and we end up getting lesser-qualified presidents. Ironically, it could be argued that BYU-Idaho has a better president now than BYU-Provo. Of course, in my fantasy world, BYU would get a non-GA president with outstanding academic credentials and with a willingness to push the BOT as much as possible for radical change regarding academic freedom, legit LDS studies, etc. Maybe someday.
__________________
"... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr. |
||
Bookmarks |
|
|