kemajic said:You're completely off the tracks here. Ever hear of research? Do you think it's undergraduates who are pushing back the barriers of science in chemistry, physics, math, biology, environmental science? Profs would get little research done but for PH.D. students doing the work. You're suggesting that advanced degree pursuit results in no more useful knowledge and capability, which is just crazy.SaskGriz said:Also not having a PhD is meaningless; A PhD is recognition that you know no more about something no one else cares about than anyone else on Earth.
That said, the president of a university is not a researcher. He/she needs less focused, but far broader skills and experience. He/she needs to be a tough manager. Faculties are not easy to manage and they do need to be managed. State governments need to lobbied for fair funding. The product needs to be in demand, provide value and marketed. There are public relations to be concerned with to maintain a positive image for the institution. Finances are not secondary in the operation of a university. Academia today is no less a swamp than DC. Bodnar looks ideal to me for this role. We are lucky for his application.
Yeah sorry I worded that wrong. I meant that in terms of being an effective leader of a university being an expert in a highly specialised area is not a requirement. I also see that I put an extra no in my lame attempt at humour. I totally agree that we are lucky that he applied and accepted. As I stated it is a great get for the university. It is interesting, I thought it might be my last two points that got a response but you were right to call me out on that statement.