UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM

Interview #950
GRANT, CARL A.

GRANT, CARL A. (1933-)
Hoefs-Bascom Professor of Education, Department of Curriculum and Instruction in the School of Education
At UW: as student 1968-1972; as professor 1974-present

Interviewed: 	2008 (3 sessions)
Interviewer: 	Robert Lange
Index by: 	Stephen A. Pierce
Length: 	5 hours, 43 minutes

Abstract: In his three February 2008 interviews with Robert Lange, Carl Grant talks about his life and career at the University of Wisconsin-Madison from the 1940s to the present.  He discusses the profound influence of his parents, teachers, racism within the armed services, and his colleagues upon his development as a teacher and scholar. He also recounts major research projects with which he was associated, such as multicultural education and the national Teachers’ Corps Associates Program.  He shares his insights from four decades of teaching and research about the department of education, the profession of teaching, the future of the university, and Afro-American studies. This interview was conducted for inclusion into the UW-Madison Oral History Program.

Key Words: Chicago IL; Huntsville AL; Tennessee State University (TSU); Nashville TN; US Army; Meharry University; racism; education; University of Wisconsin-Madison; Teachers’ Corps; Associates program; tenure; multicultural education; WI Center for Educational Research; Donna Shalala; Afro-American Studies department; Anna Julia Cooper program; globalization; graduate students; Curriculum and Instruction department.

First Interview Session (February 26, 2008): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:26	Question: Talk about your birthplace and parents. Answer: Grant was born in Chicago IL on June 6, 1933; his parents both migrated to Chicago from the South—his mother, a housewife from Huntsville AL and his father, a dentist from Nashville TN. He described his as a “typical family” from the south side of Chicago. He talked about his mother’s warm hospitality, though they didn’t drink much, and his father’s passion for baseball, and also about Sunday dinners during which both his parents cooked and made homemade ice cream.

00:06:09	Question: What years are these? Answer: Late 1930s, 40s. He talked about the warmth of the neighborhood atmosphere, the busy interaction there, and his aunt’s flower garden.

00:07:59	Question: Was education valued? Answer: Yes, it was valued but they weren’t “beat over the head” about it, because excellence was just expected and indeed each of his siblings excelled throughout school especially through his mother’s quiet encouragement. He said his father was supportive and approachable, always full of stories from war, travel, and medical school. He thought his relationship with his graduate students was due to the seeds of those stories about his father’s professors.

00:13:59	Question: Talk about your elementary and HS education. Answer: He went to Douglas School, an all-black school with some white teachers and a white principal. He recalled teachers who demanded excellence, citing his 5th grade teacher Mrs. Randall (who encouraged him that he could do things in life and submitted his name for double-promotion) and also his 6th grade teacher who demanded students concen-trate on their own work and dress appropriately, and who he admired later in life.

00:19:03	[no question] He continued to talk about teachers he admired. His 7th grade teacher Mrs. Lake “filled us with the arts”, though she was very different from Mrs. Randall. His 8th grade teacher helped prepare his class for HS. He talked about vying for the seat that denoted the one with the best grade in the class, remarking about the privilege of being one of the smarter kids in class. Follow up: Did this lead to discipline problems? Answer: No. Teachers didn’t put up with misbehavior.

00:24:33	Question: Were you conscious of being smart and different? Answer: Not different; he talked about much of his friends’ activity outside of school being related to school, which helped him succeed. Follow up: Is that a lost dynamic? Answer: More attention needs to be given to it.

00:27:40	Question: After graduating 8th grade? Answer: Grant said while he wanted to go to the University of Chicago Lab School—to see how he would fare against the best—his mother was hesitant, so he went to Wendell Phillips HS. Follow up: Why didn’t your mother want you to go? Answer: She had come from the South and seen racism, and the Lab School was an unknown. He recalled a teacher advising him within the first semester of HS to take up an instrument (to get a college scholarship) and start typing because his handwriting was so bad. So he took 4 years of typing.

00:34:34	[no question] Grant discussed another teacher who encouraged his interest in Junior American Red Cross, traveling with the group, being featured with 9 other graduating seniors from Wendell Phillips in the Chicago Tribune, and being involved in the school newspaper. Follow up: Was Phillips an integrated school? Answer: No, it was all-black; he remembered the African-American principal Mrs. Lewis.

00:39:18	[no question] He noted the difference between Phillips HS and some of the Northside HSs in Chicago was the intensity of preparation for college that they had. Follow up: Were many Phillips students college-bound? Answer: Just a number of them, because it was not promoted vigorously—he talked about “flat-out brilliant” students who dropped out because they didn’t get support.

00:45:08	Question: Did Phillips have as many good teachers as the Northside schools? Answer: He thought they had good teachers, though he wondered how hard teachers worked to push students.

00:47:26	Question: Did you visit members of your family in the South? Answer: Yes; they used to visit his mother’s brothers in Huntsville AL, both of whom were successful businessmen. He talked about his uncle’s dance hall, which hosted some of the great performers of the time. Follow up: Was it hard to go into the South? Answer: Yes and no. He recalled knowing the expectations and staying within his uncle’s “bubble.”

00:52:04	Follow up: Sounds so foreign. Answer: Yes; he remembered the friendliness of whites to his uncle, but the deference he had to show them and the way he had to protect Grant. He discussed the good life his uncles led despite the “despicable conditions” in Alabama; and said that even though his uncles tried to convince his family to return to help with their business, his mother refused because they were used to being able to speak their mind.

00:57:48	Question: When did you graduate from Phillips? Answer: Early 1950s. He wanted to go to Northwestern Univ., but his mother again resisted. He enrolled at Univ. of IL at Chicago (Navy Pier). While he did well on entrance exams, he recalled not being pre-pared for the adjustment to the cold, college courses, and an all-white environment. After his mother suggested he visit his brothers at Tennessee State University (TSU), a historically black school, he decided to transfer there.

01:03:24	Follow up: Were classes smaller? Answer: Yes, but people were more caring as well. Follow up: Was TSU a private college? Answer: No, it was a state university. Follow up: Were you still focused on becoming an MD? Answer: He’d had that dream since he was about 5 or 6. Follow up: Memorable professors? Answer: He talked about his first psychology professor, a dramatic black history teacher, and a French professor who taught him to love languages.

01:08:27	[no question] Grant discussed his decision to just have fun and take liberal arts courses his senior year, his brother’s suggestion that he take courses at the school of education in case he didn’t get accepted at a medical school, and the dean of education’s pushing him through a two-year course in a year.

01:13:09	[no question] He talked about student teaching in Nashville HS—on his first day, his cooperating teacher became acting principal which left him in charge of the class. Follow up: Were you scared? Answer: Maybe a little bit, but he didn’t intimidate easily and got along with everyone pretty well.

01:15:11	Question: After graduating from TSU? Answer: He said he returned to Chicago and while he was “dickering with Meharry” over his admission, he was drafted to the US Army. He served two years in San Francisco working in a special unit because of his science training. While he was offered to go to officer school, he declined.

01:19:48	[no question] After declining officer training, he went to Letterman Hospital at the Presidio, though his unit was normally an all-white unit. He described a major of his who he impressed and with whom he did research on warts a certain group of pilots had developed.

01:25:30	[no question] Soon after this experience he was transferred to a lab facility at Fort Baker. He described the reaction of the colonel in charge of the unit when they realized he was black. After beating the colonel at pool, the colonel exclaimed “Another misspent youth!” and assigned him to scrape paint at an isolated barracks.

01:31:39	[no question] Grant talked about being conflicted about his mistreatment. So after he subtly hinted that his parents were coming to visit and would probably take issue with his treatment, and noted that at the time “Uncle Sam were afraid of mothers,” he was routed through the (unnecessary) training program. At that point, he made a point of getting excellent scores on his Friday tests in order to show up his colonel.

01:36:46	[no question] He also recalled the colonel trying to engage him in philosophical discussions, at which he would “chew him up.” After his training, he was transferred to the Oakland Army Terminal. Follow up: Were you angry at the treatment? Answer: “It was a challenge.” He said anger wasn’t very helpful, since his word would have very little currency against a colonel in the Army.

01:41:21	[no question] Grant told an anecdote that illustrated his feelings during the time. After being picked up by a white woman to go to a party and returning late one night, the guard on duty pulled her over and reprimanded her at the exit checkpoint. He respon-ded by confronting the guard in the mess hall; the soldier never bothered him again. He said he pushed back in situations of obvious racism, but he was selective and intelligent about the person and situation he was dealing with. Question: Did that experience change you at all? Answer: It confirmed what he already knew and gave him some confidence, but didn’t affect him greatly.

01:48:57	Question: So what happens next? Answer: After getting out of the Army, he became ill for 2 yrs. Because he had to wait before re-applying to medical school, his mother convinced him to pursue teaching. He related going to the Board of Education, taking the entry tests, and immediately getting a substitute job at a local elementary school.

01:54:52	Question: You were in a science class? Answer: No, in an upper elementary class. He related that he enjoyed it, the students seemed eager to learn, and they gave him “that three minutes that I needed.” Follow up: What does that mean? Answer: He said it was that short moment that, when seized, let’s both parties know they can work together. Follow up: Did you fall in love with teaching? Answer: Not really, but he felt more than comfortable with it and was good at it.

01:58:20	Question: Where did you teach from 1962-1967? Answer: He became permanent at Wadsworth Elem. School in Chicago, and described the esprit de corps among the young faculty of the school, who wanted to make a difference in students’ lives. Follow up: Was Wadsworth an inner city school? Answer: Yes, right off 64th street. He related dramatically changing the school schedule so that he had enough time to “force march” his students to the Museum of Science and Industry, whose exhibits could teach some principles better than anything he could set up in class.

02:03:25	[no question] He discussed taking kids in his classes to a movie and a restaurant on the weekends and developing cooperative relationships with kids’ parents. He also talked about having high expectations and dealing with gang members.

02:06:30	Question: Why did you leave to become a principal? Answer: He talked about the government initiative to identify and recruit talented minority administrators, being assistant principle and then acting principle at Sumner. While at Sumner, a friend suggested he pursue a doctoral degree in education at UW. Question: When did you secure your MA? Answer: From Loyola in the evenings.

02:09:52	Question: So in January you came to UW? Answer: He described his first impressions of Madison as a more peaceful place than Chicago, being admitted on short notice, commuting to classes, and his mother’s advice about staying awake. Answer: Was the School of Education as prominent then as now? Answer: Probably so. 

02:13:54	Follow up: Did you start full time at some point? Answer: He moved his family to Madison and continued to go to Chicago to substitute. Follow up: That must have made you unusual among doctoral students. Answer: Probably, but he noted that he and his friend Bob didn’t know that many people in the department, because no one particularly reached out to them.

02:17:31	Question: How did you formulate a dissertation topic? Answer: He said that none of the science texts he used in Chicago was representative of his students—there were no scientists of color. So at UW, he started investigating text materials and wondering what would happen if texts related to students of color. At the same time, Vere DeVault was working with SRA, who had just published the “We are Black” series, and was able to procure 20 copies of the series for Grant.

02:22:28	[no question] Grant continued discussing his dissertation project implementing the “We are Black” series from SRA in a Chicago school. A friend in the district office helped him secure support from local schools, from which he selected 20 test classes and 20 controls. Follow up: How long? What did you find? Answer: Maybe for a semester. He said the kids were excited, it improved reading and school attendance, though not self-concept. Follow up: But it was enjoyable? Successful? Answer: Yes.

02:26:46	End of First Interview Session

Second Interview Session (February 27, 2008): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:21	Question: Talk about being co-director of the WI Technical Assistance Project from 1970-72. Answer: He said that the project was a federally-funded 10-university initiative to help other universities implement competency-based education program, and required that each university include a female and scholar of color. After his colleague turning down the opportunity, he was offered the chance to become a co-director and travelled nationally to offer assistance with competency-based education.

00:06:01	[no question] This experience, he said, introduced him to the goings on of the Office of Education in DC as well as other universities. During his time serving in DC, he was also selected to direct an initiative (“Associates Program”) of the newly-formed Teacher Corps that selected and trained minorities to serve in roles of educational leadership. This was when he moved from just being a graduate student on the Technical Assistance Project into a position of national prominence.

00:12:46	Question: Were you a PhD being paid by UW? Answer: Yes, he got his degree in 1972, but was being paid by a grant from the program. Follow up: Did any prominent people come out of the program? Answer: Yes, a number of people went into education either at universities or the federal level. Follow up: Were they all teachers? Answer: Many taught at universities, but some were on “soft money.”  Follow up: Did the School of Education support you? Answer: The larger program had been approved by the department, and it brought federal money in, so most supported it.

00:17:44	Question: It was about a 6-week course? Answer: Yes, it was intense, and they would also travel to hear other speakers (he gave the example of Asa Hilliard in San Francisco) Follow up: Were you writing about the project? Answer: Not much.

00:19:10	Question: So in 1972 you were invited to join the faculty? Answer: Not really; he said it was a way for the dept to save money since he was around and they needed an instructor. He wasn’t paid any more. Follow up: Were you thinking in terms of staying at UW? Answer: No, it never occurred to him. When he was hired as an asst. professor, he didn’t even know the position was advertised. He talked about his and his friends’ intention to pass the principals’ exam in the Chicago school district. But when he was offered the job and consulted with his friends, they advised him that he could influence the schools as much from his professorship as being a principal.

00:25:14	Question: Was that sound advice? Answer: Yes. He reflected on another friend who had the opportunity to be superintendent of Chicago schools, but declined because of the politics. Follow up: Do you ever wish you could have run a major school system? Answer: No; the only job he wished he could have done was the deanship of the School of Education. Follow up: So you decided that you were content to be a researcher? Answer: Yes, relatively. He qualified by noting that it wasn’t an overnight realization, but came as people approved of what he was doing.

00:29:35	[no question] Grant talked about querying his colleagues at UW about “What is a professor?” Follow up: What is a professor? Answer: He thought it was someone who gives through helping people achieve what they want to achieve. He talked about the need to deal with family and social relationships while trying to help the student.

00:33:30	Question: What were your responsibilities as asst. professor? Answer: He was expected to run the student teaching program. He noted that because several of his predecessors had failed to get tenure, if he failed the department would change it to a non-tenure position. He said he had no problem with leading the program, but had to learn what UW’s scholarly expectations were. He said the biggest hurdle was figuring out how the game was played, not having an academic mentor.

00:38:15	Question: What were you teaching? Answer: Other than two years, he’d always taught Introduction to Education and the graduate Supervision of Student Teachers course—no one ever offered him to design a course of his interest. Question: Did it matter that you were the only faculty of color? Answer: He talked about the challenges of not having collegiality and subtle racism. Follow up: But you didn’t contemplate leaving? Answer: “No one chases me away.”

00:41:44	Question: What was it like teaching mostly white students? Answer: He said it was difficult early on, but it was just due to lack of exposure. Question: Who was dean when you came? Answer: Don McCarty Follow up: Was he a good dean? Answer: Oh, yes; he talked about how he got to know McCarty while preparing a conference presentation on competency-based education, only to find out he was actually doing the presentation. Later on when he came up for asst. professor, he noted, he had McCarty’s blessing and he always felt he could talk to him.

00:48:09	Question: Were there many faculty of color at UW at the time? Did you ever meet? Answer: Not many; he didn’t remember meeting formally or informally. Question: Was UW well-regarded? Answer: He didn’t know, and never thought about it in those terms.

00:49:36	Question: And you got tenure in 1978? What was it like? Answer: It wasn’t bad. He said Dale Johnson was in charge of his tenure case and helped him prepare the materials. Follow up: Why do you think you “squeezed through”? Answer: Because at the time, few people appreciated or understood the work he was doing, so it was difficult to get published in the normal educational journals. He talked about one article he was encouraged to submit to the Journal of Teacher Education, which would not normally have published his studies.

00:55:15	Question: What was your thesis in the article? Answer: That multicultural education was not simplistic, including many dimensions of race, class, gender. Follow up: Were you one of the early scholars working in this field? Answer: Very much so. Follow up: Did this determine your reputation? Answer: Yes, but it was also the quality of his work.

00:57:01	Question: How worried were you about tenure? Answer: He wasn’t, because if he didn’t get it, he would simply return to Chicago. He recalled not being awestruck with UW or being overly relieved when he heard he’d gotten tenure. Follow up: Do you think the tenure process has become harder recently? Answer: He didn’t know because he remembered many people not getting tenure; but he thought “people then did their work.”

01:02:24	Question: Were you starting to speak nationally about multicultural education? Answer: Yes, with Teacher Corps, sometimes on both sides of the country in a single day and on the same podium with Terrel Bell. Follow up: Where? Answer: Associations, universities, school districts. But he said at this point he wasn’t getting a national audience because he wasn’t invited to give keynotes, only sessions at conferences.

01:06:52	Question: Did your teaching responsibilities change? Answer: No, it was still 2 and 2, with the student teacher program counting as a course. Follow up: How did that work? Answer: He said he had 8-12 supervisors observing student teachers and he would oversee, trouble-shoot, and meet with superintendents. Follow up: How often did you have to counsel a student not to teach? Answer: It wasn’t unusual. He said sometimes a teacher would even approach him in a store to counsel about a student.

01:09:17	Question: Are students required to major in a subject or education? Answer: Yes, it used to be called an “area of concentration” in elementary school and HS teachers major in their subject area. Follow up: Were you starting to take graduate students? Answer: Yes, almost from the beginning, mainly on urban and multicultural issues.

01:11:10	Question: Any significant grad students? Answer: Maureen Gillette, at NEIU; Christine Sleeter at UCMB; Lynne Boyle-Baise at Indiana; Evelyn Reid at Webster U.; Susan Melnick at MSU; and others. Follow up: So you have disciples across the country? Answer: Not disciples; critical thinkers whose ideas are compatible with his.

01:13:56	Question: What is it you think needs to happen to educate all people? Answer: He related his views in a recent article that argued not for Afrocentric education, but for multicultural education—that we should learn about the histories and cultures of everyone. What do we tell our grandchildren about globalization while embracing social justice and civil rights of all people inclusively. He talked about how this would happen—with quality, caring teachers, parents who know how to help their kids, schools with resources.

01:20:49	Question: Elaborate on what you see in the future of public education. Answer: He said it depended on the 2008 elections and better educating students to live in global society. 

01:23:17	Question: Did you become more active in UW service after getting tenure? Answer: Since being a grad student, he’d been on numerous committees. Follow up: Any parti-cularly important ones? Answer: He questioned the importance of most committees who act in a simply advisory role, but said he’d been in a number of diversity committees.

01:25:47	Question: Talk about the impact of Donna Shalala. Answer: He said she was “a terrific person and a terrific administrator.” She came while he was chair of Afro-American Studies, and he related an anecdote about her calling him within weeks of coming. He observed that she read the pulse of the campus and was willing to step out to do what was right in terms of diversity.

01:29:56	[no question] Grant recalled meeting with Shalala, hosting a party so she could brain-storm with the Afro-American Studies dept, and requesting resources for entertaining community leaders, holding the Brown v. Board of Education conference. He quipped about only ever visiting the president’s mansion when Shalala was chancellor. Follow up: Was she successful in implementing multicultural studies? Answer: He said she made a dent in it, but was resisted.

01:34:10	Question: Talk about becoming a Fulbright scholar. Answer: During 1982-83, he was at Birmingham Polytechnical, but was really spending a lot of time on a European speaking circuit. He talked about being invited to speak various places and taking his children with him. He said he studied a school there but never published on it.

01:37:48	Question: What did you do then? Answer: Writing, research, and suffering through Ronald Reagan. Question: Talk about the WI Center for Education Research. Answer: He said he and a colleague had a grant working in teacher education. Follow up: Were you working in Milwaukee? Answer: No; he’d never been invited to work there. UW-Milwaukee is better connected to Milwaukee Public Schools, but even that is not close. He talked about his relationship with Martin Haberman.

01:42:47	Question: Talk about applying for deanship. Answer: It was when Donna Shalala was at UW, and he came to within the last three finalists. He remarked that he wouldn’t have lasted as dean, however, because he would have been too confrontational and outspoken in the national media. He felt there was no public voice for education because current deans didn’t want to be too confrontational.

01:46:38	Question: What things would you have said? Answer: Education for urban kids and kids of color needs more resources; quality teachers. Principals need to be more carefully selected and support teachers more. Parents need to be brought into the picture. Follow up: Why is that? Answer: Part of it is that it’s too political.

01:49:29	Question: How did you become chair of Afro-American Studies? Answer: He was asked to be part of the program and noted that he was blown away when he was asked to be chair. He also talked about problems on campus while he was chair of Afro-American students feeling neglected, needing new faculty, not having appropriate space. He talked about increasing the number of faculty by 50% by convincing people it was for the good of the university

01:54:21	[no question] Grant discussed a program (Anna Julia Cooper) he started with Shalala to correct the problem that African American scholars were not prepared to give job talks. He proposed that these scholars be given a year to simply “soak in the UW climate” in order to talk to other faculty and learn to be a professor. He said this was because most African-American graduate students haven’t been mentored in graduate school.

02:00:24	Question: Who were some of the faculty who the program recruited? Answer: Stanlie James, whose mother was part of the Teachers’ Corps Associates program. Follow up: That phenomenon continues? Answer: Yes. He said a graduate student needed to become close to their major professor in order to compete in the job market.

02:04:17	Question: What’s the current status of Afro-American Studies? Answer: It’s still succeeding. Follow up: Is it attractive to students of color or white students? Answer: Both, but it only offered an MA.

02:06:11	End of Second Interview Session

Third Interview Session (February 28, 2008): Digital File

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:20	Question: Has the undergraduate population at UW changed? Answer: He said the majority of students who come to UW are extremely bright, especially in the last 15 years. However, regarding issues of race, class, and gender, they were “somewhat wanting.” He said it was always enriching to have students from urban centers because many young women would marry young men who were getting employed in large urban areas, which led them to teach in city schools.

00:05:17	[no question] He said another thing he noticed about students was a shift in students’ political attitudes and receptiveness toward implementing multicultural education, rather than just talking and listening about it. He attributed this to a changing atmo-sphere around interracial and gay/lesbian relationships.

00:09:07	Question: Has the demographic of teachers being young white women changed? Answer: A little bit; there are a few more men. Follow up: What about students of color? Answer: The number has actually decreased as opportunities have increased in other fields. Follow up: Talk about the quality of young teachers. Answer: He said teachers of his generation were excellent in regard to their expectations and motiva-tional techniques, where this generation’s knowledge base is excellent, but their success and school’s reception of new ideas are still in question.

00:13:35	Question: Do these students have as good a work ethic as before? Answer: Yes, they’re hungry and competitive. Follow up: Is grade inflation an issue? Answer: He didn’t know without looking at the statistics; but didn’t think so. But for him, grades weren’t the core issue—helping students teach was.

00:15:41	Question: How do you teach your intro course? Answer: He said he tailored his evalu-ation method depending on how engaged the class seems to be—he gave examples of more creative examination that both created rapport and allowed them to discuss choices, conversations, and thought processes they’d not normally be able to share.

00:22:03	Question: Are you continuing to teach? Answer: Yes, hopefully the Intro class, a graduate class, and a globalization class.

00:23:15	Question: Do you get your greatest stimulation working with graduate students? Answer: Yes, and with previous graduate students. Follow up: How many students do you have? Answer: About 12 or 13. He said he could handle this because he was available 24-7. He said the example of his father’s major professor stuck with him in this regard. Follow up: And it doesn’t drain you? Answer: For the most part, no. But he talked about trying to train students not just through the PhD, but also for life.

00:31:20	Question: You’ve had hundreds of graduate students? Answer: Perhaps, but it really developed since the late 1980s, when multicultural education blossomed. Follow up: With the #1 ranking, you must be inundated with applications. Answer: Yes, 5 or 6 a week, and the satisfaction came from people asking to get a multicultural education rather than questioning what he was researching.

00:35:57	Question: Gloria Ladson-Billings says you were the reason she came here. Answer: He said their versions of the story were different; he remembered hearing her speak, thinking she was a person of promise, and offering to get her to UW if she wanted it. When he returned, he “got it introduced then got out of the way of it” so his involve-ment wouldn’t give people a reason to obstruct it.

00:40:51	Question: Does the reputation of C&I rest on your backs? Answer: No! He named other “outstanding colleagues”—Michael Apple, Tom Popkewitz, Ken Zeichner, and others—who were “kicking it.” He said there were also a team—professors and staff both—of people who allowed you to do your best rather than being petty, which denoted caring.

00:45:46	Question: Can C&I throw its weight around? Answer: It doesn’t work that way; he argued that they hadn’t been able to leverage their prominence to get privileges around the university, in part because university leadership had come from the sciences, rather than from education, and therefore education was seen as a service dept. He noted that this was why they would have fired him had he become dean.

00:50:05	Question: Any observations about chancellors? Answer: He had known all of them, and thought they were all okay, but not great for education. Follow up: If you were on the search committee, what kind of chancellor would you look for? Answer: He said search committees are so “neatly channeled” that it would be hard to have an effect, because education took a back seat to the sciences. 

00:53:22	Follow up: If you could just pick the chancellor, what kind of person would you pick? Answer: Referring to a recent book he’d written about fundamental global changes in university education, he posited that a new chancellor should understand and engage these global changes, be cosmopolitan, and have a vision of what needs to happen across the university, and not just in the sciences.

00:58:42	Follow up: Where do you find people like that? Answer: You may have to look out-side the box. Question: Are you not enamored with the WI tradition of promoting from within? Answer: It’s okay, but doesn’t promote vision. Question: Should the university become private, like Michigan? Answer: No, it should remain public. He thought the inexorable reduction in state support could be changed because UW does so much for the state of WI.

01:02:46	Question: What do you see for UW in the next 50 yrs? Answer: It will probably keep doing what it’s doing—building buildings, emphasizing science while maintaining other depts. Follow up: Are you not in favor of science leading UW? Answer: He was proud of the scientific tradition, but didn’t think science needed to lead, because globalization highlighted the need to learn to live with one another. He cited the example of the growing debate over human rights and talked about the importance of Barack Obama winning the election of 2008.

01:10:27	End of Third Interview Session

End of Oral History #950