The Ten-Year Report By the Thirteenth President

In 1975, I began my five-year report by characterizing each of the years by a single dominant event. They were described as: 1) The Year of Cambodia and Kent State; 2) The Year of the Coed Debate; 3) The Year of Implementation; 4) The Year of the Medical School; 5) The Year of the Budget. I ended my introduction by expressing great curiosity as to what labels I would use for the next five years. I expressed the hope that none of them would be the "year we ran out of money" and that at least one of them would be the "year we concentrated on academic issues."

I feel that the second five years of my presidency have been qualitatively different from the first five. One symptom of this is that I cannot come up with similar labels for individual years. There were no changes comparable in magnitude to coeducation and year-round operation. The old problems would occur over and over again. At least two more years had significant addi- tional debates concerning coeducation until the trustees adopted a policy of equal access. Every year has been the "year of the Medical School," and, while fortunately we never ran out of money, neither did we ever have the luxury of forgetting finan- cial problems even for a single year.

I am confident that future historians will report that we are now going through the most prolonged financial crisis in the history of American higher education. In addition, as I predicted several years ago, we have seen the end of a century of steady growth for the system of higher education and for individual in- stitutions. We have now entered what is called "steady state," where the size of even the most fortunate institutions will not in- crease and many may have to shrink or go out of existence. This is caused not only by the financial problems but by demographic factors: We have passed the peak of the number of 18-year-olds in the population and there will be a steady decline throughout the eighties. It has not been a period in which one could think of great new projects to launch. Instead, one is reminded of Through the Looking Glass, since "it takes all the running you can do, to keep in the same place." The major challenge for all our educational institutions has been to maintain quality. It has been a very tough fight. Fortunately, in the case of Dartmouth, the quality was very high and well worth fighting for. And I do not believe that we are nearing the end of that fight. I expect there are several more difficult years still to come for higher education.

That does not mean that the last five years have been lacking either in achievements or in memorable events. I will be report- ing on the expansion and strengthening of many of our academic programs as well as some important though modest additions to the curriculum. In a "buyer's market" we have been able to at- tract a superb junior faculty, many of whom will have a lasting impact on Dartmouth College. Nor has all the financial news been negative. The growth of the Alumni Fund has been spec- tacular. We are in the midst of the Campaign for Dartmouth, the most ambitious fund-raising effort in the history of the College, and at the half-way point we are on target for its successful com- pletion.

Rather, there has been an acceleration of the tempo of higher education. Problems come with greater frequency, and they are more persistent. We are ever more subject to increasing federal regulation and the bureaucratic nightmare that it implies. There is a tendency on the part of all constituencies to attribute national problems to the institution or to take out their frustrations on the College. Yet Dartmouth College has come through the decade e. the seventies an extremely strong institution with an outstanding faculty and a student body of the highest caliber. Most impor- tant, the College does not lack for those who love it.

Baker Library and the glass tower of the Fairchild Center-