Big-time TV contracts, roaring crowds, and $100 million annual revenues are appealing to universities and their student-athletes. But are athletics programs still fulfilling the mission of higher education?

By Aaron W. Jaco, JO’07, AS’07

For centuries, colleges and universities have been beacons for young people to learn, find their passion, hone a craft, and mature into ethical leaders. The model of higher education is one that has traditionally been tailored to meet those needs—with the ultimate goal to create and instill knowledge, prepare global citizens for meaningful professional pursuits, and fulfill a social compact to serve the public good.

At the same time, thousands of students use their college years to participate in athletics, an endeavor that has long been thought to go hand-in-hand with academics. But developments in some sectors of intercollegiate athletics are bringing sport into conflict with the core mission of higher education. The addition of television contracts, video game sales, and other major licensing deals has transformed Division I athletics into a high-revenue business venture—fraught with added pressures, larger time commitments, and fiercer competition among student-athletes.

While the demands associated with participation increase, data show that the valuable lessons traditionally associated with athletic competition—including fair play, critical thinking, teamwork, and trust—are falling by the wayside. Off the playing field, institutional spending on coaches’ salaries and other expenses are increasing at a rate higher than spending on academics.

Confronted by these challenges and more, college and university leaders are working with athletics regulators and others to find a balance between commercialism and the core purpose of our colleges and universities.

Big-money athletics

The Southeastern Conference, the nation’s top-earning athletics conference, collected more than $1 billion in receipts in 2010.

The Big Ten Conference was right behind it with $905 million. Individually, several schools have consistently topped $100 million in annual revenues for the past five years or more.

Television contracts generate a large chunk of that revenue. In 2010, the NCAA reached a 14-year, $10.8 billion television rights deal for the NCAA Men’s Basketball Championship. A new college football playoff, set to begin in 2014, is expected to raise another half-billion dollars. Those revenue sources are parsed out to member colleges and universities based on a variety of factors.

Altogether, television contracts and other marketing rights constituted nearly 20 percent of revenue for schools within the Division I Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS), the top level in college football, in 2010. Schools also earned cash directly from ticket sales (24 percent), donor contributions (22 percent), and other sources, including institutional/government support, student fees, and corporate sponsorship.

Full-time commitment?

One byproduct of that money—and the competitive environment it promotes—is a higher standard for student-athlete performance. Competing in college sport can be a rigorous, full-time endeavor, and one that is taking more and more of a student-athlete’s time. The NCAA allows 20 hours of official practice per week, but games, travel, voluntary workouts, and other commitments can double the amount of time students spend on athletics.

In 2010, student-athletes in Division I and II men’s basketball, Division I Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) football, and Division I baseball reported an increase in the time they spent every week on athletic pursuits compared with respondents in 2006.

Division I FBS football players practiced and competed the most: more than 43 hours a week while in-season. Division I baseball and FCS football players also reported an average time commitment in excess of 40 hours per week. In Division III, student-athletes reported spending at least 30 hours per week in-season on their sport.

Even when coaches exercise moderation in their practice regimens, university officials are faced with the fact that some students prioritize athletics above their work in the classroom. In 2011, a study by the NCAA showed that a majority of Division I student-athletes listed athletics participation as a more important factor than academic offerings in their college decision. This held true across all sports for student-athletes of both genders, not only for players on men’s marquee teams.

University officials must ensure that their students succeed academically while making sure not to stifle their athletic potential, says Gene Smith, athletic director at The Ohio State University.

“We have elite athletes who aspire to win championships and be the best they can be,” Smith says. “We want to make sure they also do what they’re supposed to do in the classroom.”

Degrees of success

A college degree is the most tangible culmination of higher education for most student-athletes—for the great majority, at least, who don’t go on to play professional sports. But does athletic participation make students more or less likely to graduate? The statistics paint a complicated picture, particularly in high-revenue sports at high-profile schools.

Federal graduation rates show that students who compete in Division I athletics are 2 percent more likely to earn a college degree than are nonathletes, according to data for students who entered college in 2005.

By the same measurement, black student-athletes are 10 percent more likely to graduate than black nonathletes, and the graduation boost is even higher for black female athletes—though in all cases they remain significantly less likely to graduate than their white counterparts.

The picture becomes more nuanced when segmented by sport. Students who participate in basketball and football are less likely to graduate than peers who participate in lower-profile sports at most Division I schools.

For example: A dozen men’s teams that competed in the 2010 NCAA tournament, or about one in five teams that took to the court, graduated fewer than 40 percent of their players, according to statistics released by the NCAA in October 2012.

That same year, five men’s teams in the NCAA tournament graduated 20 percent or fewer of their black players, and two teams graduated none of their black student-athletes who entered the program from 1999 through 2002, according to an editorial that U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan wrote for ESPN.com.

The College Sport Research Institute (CSRI) at the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill used another model to compare Division I football players with full-time male students who did not participate in sports. The study found that football players are less likely to graduate at a majority of Division I schools. The CSRI found the highest discrepancy in graduation rates within the Pacific-12 (Pac-12), one of the nation’s top-earning athletic conferences, where football players graduated at a rate 27 percent lower than their full-time male counterparts. (The discrepancy was even higher when comparing black football players with the overall male student body.)

Level playing field?

The Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, a group of higher education officials, journalists, and others with a stake in the future of college sports, has pushed for stricter NCAA standards to address disparities in academic outcomes among colleges and universities. Such regulations, the commission suggests, should carry financial rewards and consequences—because without the incentive of money, schools may sacrifice their focus on academics in pursuit of a competitive advantage and an extra buck.

“It’s difficult for an institution that is doing everything it can to keep athletics aligned with the university mission,” says Amy Perko, the Knight Commission’s executive director. “Because the reality is, you’re competing on the athletic field with your competitors, who may not adhere to those same standards.”

The academic performance at any given school tends to be influenced more by institutional priorities and culture than by revenues, says Jean Boyd, associate athletic director for student-athlete development at Arizona State University.

“You take a school like Northwestern or Duke or Stanford—those who have an academic identity that is historically firmly entrenched and long-lasting—and there I think you’ll find the best of both worlds: The money stream is high, and the academic performance is high as well,” Boyd says. “But there are situations on the other end, in which schools have vast monetary resources but a [graduation rate] that is relatively low. It probably has more to do with the culture there than with money.”

The basketball squad at Gonzaga University, a private Roman Catholic institution in Spokane, Wash., has appeared in the NCAA tournament every year since 1999, including six Sweet Sixteen finishes. The team has also graduated all but one of its men’s basketball players who completed NCAA eligibility at the university since 2000.

“It’s true that some [Division I teams] place higher emphasis on academics than others,” says Mike Roth, athletic director at Gonzaga. “But that’s an individual school’s prerogative. It doesn’t seem to harm our competitive edge, though I see how it could.”

For Gonzaga, athletics advance the university’s mission primarily by increasing visibility. The name recognition that results from ESPN appearances and the glow of athletics victories are powerful marketing tools that boost applications and allow the university to be more selective in its enrollment practices.

“There are many students out there who know us first because of our basketball program,” Roth says. “You literally can’t buy that kind of publicity.”

The impact of athletics success has varied, with research suggesting that application increases resulting from successful seasons tend to be temporary. Some college administrators believe that a consistently competitive athletics team substantially benefits admissions, while others have said that simply having Division I teams matters more than any one team’s success.

Lessons on the field

Most athletics officials, student-athletes, and fans would agree that sport provides an exceptional learning experience for participants—that coaches teach their students to develop critical thinking skills, to work as a team, and to perform under pressure. Those outcomes, among others, strike at the core mission of higher education by promoting career preparedness and receptiveness to learning.

On the other hand, a significant number of student-athletes today say they are not perceiving an institutional emphasis on other key values, which include ethics, honesty, and fairness. As competition heats up, do these values fall by the wayside?

In 2011, only 57 percent of Division I football players surveyed by the NCAA said they “strongly agree” with an assertion that “my head coach defines success not just by winning but by winning fairly.” Fewer than 50 percent of participants in men’s basketball, baseball, other men’s sports, and women’s basketball strongly agreed with the survey question.

Similarly, between 39 and 56 percent of Division I student-athletes strongly agreed with the assertion that “my head coach can be trusted.” Responses varied by gender, conference, and school. Between 61 and 77 percent of Division I athletes strongly agreed that academic honesty is highly valued at their institution, with the fewest number of football players saying they strongly agree.

Proactive steps

As myriad elements continue to complicate the dynamic between higher-ed institutions and their athletics programs, NCAA officials and some schools are using new approaches to ensure that athletics remains a faithful extension of the university’s core mission—or at least serves a complementary function.

In 2011, the NCAA adopted a rule requiring schools to be on track to graduate at least 50 percent of its players in order to be eligible for postseason competition. The mandate, adopted 10 years after the Knight Commission first advocated for it, was more stringent than those recommended by some other proponents of athletics reform, including Education Secretary Duncan.

The NCAA also recently increased its minimum GPA for eligibility in Division I sport. Student-athletes must maintain a 2.3 GPA in certain core classes—up from the previous minimum GPA of 2.0—beginning with students in the graduating class of 2016.

A third development ties academic performance to financial revenue to an unprecedented extent. In 2012, officials who oversee a new college football playoff agreed to allocate nearly 10 percent of revenues from that event—projected to earn $470 million a year—to schools based on their academic performance. It’s the first time in college football history that schools will be directly financially rewarded for the results of their work in the classroom, according to Perko, of the Knight Commission.

Also last year, the NCAA reversed a rule that prohibited institutions from awarding multiyear scholarships to student-athletes. That rule, which stood for 40 years, gave some institutions the wiggle room to cut funding for students who underperformed on the playing field—making it more difficult, or impossible, for shunned student-athletes to afford to finish school. Officials hope the use of multiyear scholarships will allow more students to earn degrees.

Other NCAA regulations aim to keep students’ focus on their classes rather than on the prospect of professional sport. Student-athletes are prohibited from accepting payment, including gifts, for participation in athletics. Rules also preclude them from profiting from commercial use of their image or likeness. The NCAA’s regulations have also led some schools to monitor their students’ use of social media and even their checking accounts—though critics of these controversial measures maintain that athletics leaders are more concerned about protecting their own image than teaching students about ethical behavior and the importance of academics.

Who pays?

At Division I institutions, some athletics programs have begun allocating money toward academics. In September 2012, for example, Louisiana State University’s athletics department agreed to give more than $36 million over five years to the university in support of academic programs. Ohio State also capitalizes on its financial windfalls to enhance the school’s ability to provide educational opportunities for students.

“Our primary goal is to support the university,” says Smith, Ohio State athletic director. “We transferred $30 million to the university [in fiscal year 2010–2011]. We paid all our scholarship costs—$16 million—and transferred another $14 million to support other parts of the institution.”

On the other hand, most schools, including those with top-earning football programs, do not make a profit on their athletics programs. The costs associated with higher-profile competition, such as increasing coaches’ salaries and facility costs, have historically offset the increase in revenue.

A majority of schools subsidize their athletics programming with university dollars—which amplifies questions about the role of athletics in advancing the university’s core mission.

Looking ahead

What is the purpose of college sport? Is it a springboard for promising young people to access a college education? To go pro? To learn life lessons that will prepare them for rewarding lives and careers?

Is it a vehicle to rally alumni support, to increase the visibility of the institution? And how does the changing financial foundation of athletics shift the way universities approach these questions? Do administrators, coaches, and student-athletes behave differently when there’s more at stake?

Whatever the future holds for intercollegiate athletics, one thing seems certain: The television deals, the money, and the crowds are here to stay. And so are the questions. As long as thousands of fans fill the stands at home games and bowl games, and pack into living rooms and restaurants to cheer their teams toward championships; as long as universities earn millions in revenue (and pay it back in millions to coaches); and as long as young men and women dream of competing and excelling at the highest level of their sports, there is certain to be continuing negotiation as schools seek a balance between the business of sport and the mission of higher education.

Creating a new model for athletics in higher education

By Tim Schmitt, GR’08, ’10

It’s no secret that some student-athletes pursue higher education primarily as a means to “study” their sport. While college sports provide a great opportunity for the vast majority of participants to grow both academically and athletically, some students don’t always make this connection. While few in the world of higher education would claim to endorse this approach, the fact is that education can sometimes take a backseat to athletics.

Colleges and universities want—and athletes want to be a part of—strong athletics teams that win championship titles and bring prestige to their schools. But there is no guarantee that shunning academics to focus on athletics results in winning teams. When this gamble for athletic greatness does happen, it takes place at the expense of student-athletes who are missing out on the education they were promised.

And it’s a gamble that need not take place. There have always been great athletes who excel in the classroom. And often, students who have struggled academically in their younger years find academic success in college thanks to the opportunity provided them by participating in athletics. Changing the mindset in higher education to expect this to be the rule rather than the exception, however, is not a simple task.

“The concept that students can learn more than their sports through athletics is not new,” says Director of Athletics Sandy Hatfield Clubb. “Learning is happening everywhere on college campuses. Unfortunately we often leave it to chance in athletics that learning happens in the best way possible. Why not develop intentionality in our programs to ensure that comprehensive learning takes place?”

This challenge exists on college campuses of all sizes across the country—and Drake is no exception. As a result, Drake’s Athletics Department, led by Hatfield Clubb and with support from Drake University President David Maxwell, has been undergoing an intentional and strategic shift in the athletics programs at Drake. Building upon traditions of academic excellence and athletic achievement already in place, Drake is intertwining learning outcomes with athletics to further develop well-rounded student-athletes as well as winning programs.

The Drake Athletics Strategic Plan calls for the University to provide leadership-based experiences for student-athletes and create a progressive model for intercollegiate sport. This plan, says Maxwell, is an example of how Drake University takes its mission seriously and how athletics can—and should—play an important role in its fulfillment.

“The Drake experience is a holistic experience,” says Maxwell. “Whether it’s in the classroom, in Greek life, in the lab, in student life, or on athletics teams, students are learning to lead. Athletics is one path that leads to the learning outcomes promoted by the University.”

Leveraging the jersey

Hatfield Clubb presented the Drake Athletics Strategic Plan to the campus community in 2010. Student-athletes now take coursework that explicitly defines and points out lessons in leadership and communication from the playfield that were previously left to chance. Additionally, they use their visibility and positions as student-athletes to engage in service work—from packaging meals through Meals from the Heartland to acting as guest lecturers in local schools—that further reinforces these lessons while benefitting the community at large.

The Seeds of Success program, made possible through a grant from DuPont Pioneer and in partnership with Character Counts, allows student-athletes to visit area middle schools and discuss with students what it takes to succeed in the classroom and in life.

“They use the power of the jersey to reach middle school students and tell their stories of success and overcoming adversity,” says Hatfield Clubb.

Drake’s student-athletes seem to understand that there is more to learn from their sport than, well, their sport. When the grant was awarded, Hatfield Clubb committed to putting 30 student-athletes into classrooms in the first year and to increasing the number of participants over subsequent years. In the first year, however, 42 student-athletes eagerly signed up to participate.

“Our students embraced the program immediately,” she says. “That speaks to the type of student-athletes who Drake recruits.”

Recruiting the right students is just the first part of the effort. Once here, student-athletes are guided through Bulldog Foundations, an extended orientation process that introduces them to the Bulldog Way and the Drake Playbook—programs that teach the importance of integrity in action for all student-athletes.

“Every coach has a philosophy and approach to ethics and success—it is not a cookie-cutter approach,” says Hatfield Clubb. “They understand that leadership involves learning who you are and developing that potential. They stretch their students and take them beyond their own mental concept of what they can do. They help them reach their full potential by getting better every day.”

But can we still win games?

The focus on athletics as a tool to teach leadership and ethics while requiring student-athletes to be academic achievers is a concept that is different for some fans. It’s natural, then, that some might ask if it is possible to take this approach and still have successful teams.

The short answer is yes.

“The concept of creating winning teams and using athletics as a teaching tool are not mutually exclusive,” says Maxwell.

The 2007–2008 men’s basketball team is a perfect example of this, he says. That team, made up of many athletes with GPAs of 3.0 or above, won the Missouri Valley Conference (MVC) championship, set a school record for wins, and advanced to the NCAA tournament.

More recently, the 2012 football team won its second consecutive conference title in November; the men’s soccer team advanced to the NCAA Elite Eight in 2010; men’s tennis won two consecutive MVC titles in 2011 and 2012; the softball team advanced to the semifinals of last year’s MVC tournament; and individual athlete honors—both academic and athletic—are too numerous to list.

But this is just the beginning. Drake University is striving for sustained success and believes that a coaching model in which there is an intentional focus on developing the human being first and educating young people to become world-class leaders will produce winning programs.

“Some have argued that Division I teams have to recruit student-athletes who are not prepared for, or focused on, the academic side of college in order to be competitive,” says Lindsay Whorton, AS’09, ED’09, a former student-athlete, first-team Academic All-American, Rhodes Scholar, Fulbright recipient, and current member of the Drake University Board of Trustees. “There are many talented athletes who are very bright and are motivated to excel both on and off the court or field. I believe that an institution that is able to truly integrate the athletic and academic spheres will be able to successfully attract these student-athletes. Such an institution will produce winning teams, teams that will also contribute to a vibrant academic environment.”

Multidimensional students

Matt Bowie, a senior biology major, member of the men’s basketball team, and a member of the football team until his eligibility ran out this year, recognizes that athletics has helped him learn some meaningful lessons—on and off the field.

“Drake Athletics is unique to other programs in not only the way academics are stressed as the highest priority to athletes but also the way the qualities of leadership, time management, self-efficacy, and others can be learned from these sports,” says Bowie. “This approach has been important to me because it assures that I don’t become one-dimensional. I am not just a student or just an athlete. The approach focuses on maintaining the balance needed to excel in both aspects and not just getting by in one or the other.”

Bowie says he learned about the power of athletics in a very real way when he traveled to Tanzania as a member of Drake’s football team in 2011 to compete in the first-ever collegiate game of American football on the African continent.

“That trip really helped me gain perspective on other cultures and myself,” he says. “It pushed me from being really introverted to where I actually love to experience new things. This is something that would not have happened without participating in athletics.”

Maxwell, who traveled with the team to Tanzania, recalls a conversation while still en route in which Bowie mentioned that, although he was interested in winning the game, he was well aware that the trip, the experience, and the service work they were to do was much bigger than the sport that brought the team there.

“The game is a catalyst,” says Maxwell. “The Africa trip was a powerful example of this. It helped teach cross-cultural communication and leadership, and it allowed these students to do meaningful work in a variety of settings for a population in need. To hear Matt articulate this was very powerful.”

Though results of implementing the Drake Athletics Strategic Plan are apparent in the words of Matt Bowie and in the actions of student-athletes across campus, the effort is really in its formative steps.

“I think there are more ways to integrate athletics and academics in a formal sense and to continue to think about the role that athletics plays in accomplishing the mission of the liberal arts university,” says Whorton. “There is room to consider how college athletics can contribute even more to the university at large and enhance the experience of non-athletes and campus life as well as student-athletes.”

Hatfield Clubb acknowledges this effort has just begun, and ensuring it continues and succeeds will require a campuswide effort.

“The majority of our work is ahead of us,” she says. “Student-athletes really do a great job supporting each other, but the question is how we build pride across the community and make sure this carries over and continues. We need to have a pervasive culture, not pockets of buy-in.”

By Kristin Looney, JO’09, AS’09, GR’10

But the first time I tried, it was exactly the opposite. I vowed, while dramatically huffing and puffing around my block, that I would retire from the sport. Yet my energy and determination overruled that idea, and I again laced up my shoes. Eventually the huffs and puffs subsided, and I begged my parents to enter me in the Ridge Run, a local event held each Memorial Day that included a kids’ one-mile “fun run.” I was 7 years old.

The race did not feel “fun.” In fact, it was torture. But the cheers that welcomed me as I crossed the finish line made the strain seem insignificant. My family encouraged me to continue competing, and I competed in the fun run for the next seven years. Over time I became focused not on winning but on improving. Beating my personal best—even by a single second—was supremely satisfying.

When I entered high school, I knew that running was something I enjoyed. However, I had clear specifications when it came to the sport: Anything over a mile was simply too far. My coach had other ideas.

During practice one day, she revealed that I would be competing in my worst nightmare: the 3,200-meter run. The thought of running two miles—let alone running them in circles on a track and in a race—made me feel like I had a rock the size of Stonehenge in my stomach.

I contemplated potential excuses. Could I feign a fracture? Could I blame bad cafeteria food? At that moment, I loathed the fact that I was a terrible liar.

As I reluctantly ran from curve to straightaway, curve to straightaway, the feelings from my first time running around the block resurfaced. Several times, I vowed that my days of running long distances were through. Yet as I crossed the finish line, the struggles transformed into smiles. My self-doubt decreased, and I had faith that I could achieve anything. With renewed confidence and drive, I set and attained several competitive goals during the following years, including qualifying for state and being named Most Valuable Player.

During my senior year in high school, I came into contact with a midsize university in Iowa that invited me to visit campus.

As a lifelong Chicagoan, my perception of Iowa was that it was covered in cornfields and students shared tractor rides to class. But what I had learned about the school—Drake University—intrigued me. The plethora of programs and boundless opportunities seemed ideal (and the blue track didn’t hurt). So I took a road trip.

The moment I arrived on campus, I knew Drake was a flawless fit: Everyone I met was warm and inviting, the students were engaged in their classes and with each other, and, of course, there was the Drake Relays. That first visit eventually led to a position on Drake’s cross-country and track-and-field teams.

When I started at Drake, I was ecstatic about everything. I took classes that I found incredibly appealing, such as Reading and Writing Short Stories and Sports Psychology. In addition, my teammates were not only dedicated, they were also extremely enthusiastic and enjoyable to be around. I developed strong friendships quickly and could not fathom being at any other school than Drake.

A few months into college, however, I encountered both academic and athletic roadblocks. Throughout my life, I had been a perfectionist. In both academics and athletics, I set high goals for myself and worked diligently to achieve them. But in college, the bar was higher. The expectations began to feel overwhelming. Within a few weeks, I received a poor grade on a paper and ran a horrible race. I began to doubt my abilities to succeed as both a student and a runner.

During those times of uncertainty, the faculty and staff at Drake reached out to me and continued to help me build my confidence. And throughout Drake Athletics, the idea was continually reinforced that successful student-athletes remain positive, dedicated, and adaptable regardless of circumstances. That concept became my mantra.

While competing, my coaches emphasized that receiving outstanding grades was even more important than attaining athletic accomplishments. While learning, my professors stressed that education was not about the grade; it was about gaining knowledge. In both athletics and academics, I learned that the amount of effort I applied would make the difference between satisfactory and superior. Because of the optimistic outlook promoted throughout Drake Athletics, I began to believe that I could soar over what I previously perceived as the unbeatable bar.

Shortly before I finished my undergraduate degree, I made a decision that would have a profound impact on my future. Although I immensely enjoyed my journalism classes, I decided to pursue a master’s degree in teaching. I was determined to make a difference, and I realized that education was my true passion. The decision to pursue higher education amounted to more time and money. Yet my confidence in my choice never wavered. Without a doubt, I knew that Drake was the place where I wanted to attend graduate school. I worked diligently in my courses, and, fortunately, my efforts were rewarded. I received my dream job—to teach high school English and journalism while coaching the school’s cross-country team.

As a teacher and coach, the messages I learned at Drake remain meaningful. At times the plethora of papers and my penchant for procrastination make tasks seem insurmountable. The huffs and puffs that I experienced during my first few times running sometimes make a return in my career. Sometimes I witness a glimmer of these doubts in my students as well: A challenging curriculum can simply seem too intimidating. A cross-country workout can seem too strenuous. Both my students’ and my comfort zones are frequently compressed.

Yet, through my years at Drake, I’ve learned to never settle for satisfactory. I’ve worked to instill this notion in my students and runners as well. The standards that Drake has encouraged me to continuously set for myself always return to the forefront of my mind. The efforts are never easy, but the results are always rewarding.

Running had transformed from an arduous test to a persistent passion.

By Elizabeth Ford Kozor, JO’07, AS’07

Early on a sunny Saturday morning in April 2010, hundreds of Drake students, faculty, and staff assembled on the lawn in front of Old Main. Many held signs promoting love and tolerance; others sang “All You Need Is Love.”

Organized by students, the gathering was a peaceful response to the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC), which had collected that morning behind police barricades in the grassy knoll between the First Christian Church and 26th Street. WBC has gained notoriety in recent years for picketing at the funerals of American soldiers and productions of The Laramie Project. The group was on campus to protest a Drake Law School symposium on same-sex marriage.

“So many people who wrote on the wall of our Facebook event expressed how important it was to not stoop to their level,” says Alex Masica, jo’12, as’12, one of the organizers of the counterprotest. “We wanted to show that people can fight hateful speech and hateful lifestyles with love and support, and I think we did a great job of that.”

In an email to campus after the event, Drake President David Maxwell called the assembly a “moment of special pride” for him as the University’s president.

“No one yelled anything negative; no one did anything inappropriate,” Maxwell says. “They were elegant, absolutely elegant, in demonstrating who we are and, by implication, who the Westboro Baptist Church is not.”

Dedicated to dialogue

The counterprotest held by the Drake community reflected elements of Drake’s Statement of Principles, which encourages “civil debate and discussion of divergent perspectives” and articulates Drake’s “abhorrence of statements that demean, denigrate, humiliate, or express hatred.” Drake did not bar the WBC from campus; however, the Drake community sent a strong message that it did not agree with the group’s beliefs.

This commitment to civility outlined in the Statement of Principles is critical for the type of learning environment Drake creates for its students; it’s also fundamental to productive academic inquiry.

“The way in which you find better truths is through the exchange of ideas and challenging each other’s ideas,” Maxwell says. “If you are not respectful of what other people think, if you do not respect other people and their right to think differently than you—not just respect it but value it—you won’t reach a higher truth, which is at the heart of an academic enterprise. Civility is essential to that.”

In an age of reality TV shows, mudslinging political ads, anonymous internet forums, and screaming on-air pundits, Drake’s commitment to civil discourse and discussion has become even more important.

Maxwell believes the University has a responsibility to demonstrate the type of civil behavior it expects from its students. This happens through campus events, such as the Constitutional Law Symposium, which invites leading experts to Drake Law School to discuss hot-button issues
in a structured debate.

Faculty members also impart lessons of civility in the classroom, where they work to create safe spaces that allow students to respectfully challenge each other and their own beliefs to grow intellectually.

Model behavior

Debra DeLaet, department chair and professor of politics and international relations, believes it is important for her to set the tone for classroom discussions early in the semester. She encourages debate but insists it be respectful and based on facts.

“I don’t find it hard to get students on board,” she says. “If I as the faculty person come committed to dialogue, if I can communicate early on that I want them to say what they really think, that it is OK for us to disagree, that they won’t get chastised for disagreeing with me, then I think they actually want to have those types of conversations.”

To teach of the value of fact-based dialogue, in her international law course DeLaet assigns law briefs on controversial issues, such as the status of Palestine as an independent state or the legality of the United States’ interrogation and detention policies during the war on terror. Each student is required to research and represent the perspectives of an involved party, regardless of the student’s personal beliefs.

“The great thing about this is that they detach themselves from their point of view,” she says. “They don’t necessarily change their own point of view, but they can usually concede there are good points in the opposing arguments.”

Ideally, the lessons learned about civil discourse will spill out of the classroom and influence the conversations students are having in campus organizations, the workplace, and beyond.

“My personal belief is that you can’t be a truly engaged citizen if you don’t know how to engage in civil disagreements,” DeLaet says. “Sometimes I hear this rhetoric of civility that says civility means we can’t disagree, that you can’t get anything done if you express your opinion strongly. If students want to be effective in their communities, learning to work through disagreements is critical.”

Civility on trial

These lessons are occasionally tested on campus, and Drake students are asked to respond to an uncivil incident in a civil manner. Last spring, a group of black students was walking along the Painted Street, when, from a window in Jewett Hall, another student shouted at them, “Get off our campus. We don’t want you on our campus …”

Reports of the incident ignited new conversations on campus—about racism, its prevalence on Drake’s campus, and the need for increased cultural understanding.

“What was striking about this incident was it was much more overt,” says Jennifer Perrine, associate professor of English. “In my six years here, I have had many students tell me about subtle or covert racism, but this was the first time I had heard of something that could not be rationalized as someone not understanding they were being inappropriate.”

With William Hatchet, new student academic facilitator, Perrine co-authored a letter to The Times-Delphic, which encouraged students and faculty to engage in productive conversations about racism and to sign a petition against such beliefs and behavior.

“We recognize this is not an isolated incident but part of a broader campus culture that pretends racism no longer exists,” they wrote. “This event demonstrates that we can no longer ignore the presence of racism on our campus and the members of the Drake community need to engage in more direct, cross-cultural dialogue.”

Nearly 550 students, faculty, and staff signed the petition, but what was most encouraging about the response was the way students came together to tackle the issue and, much like in the case of the Westboro Baptist Church counterprotest, take a stand against intolerance.

More than 100 students, faculty, and staff attended a Student Senate meeting after the event took place. What resulted was a sincere and open conversation about race and acceptance on the Drake campus.

“The responses I saw were positive; students were trying to figure out why this happened and facilitate understanding,” says Perrine. “Instead of speaking from a place of anger, they spoke about the importance of frank conversations about race on campus. Where they had animosity before, there was now a possibility for groups to work together.”

Perrine says although the dialogue was productive, the issue is far from resolved. She is a member of the Working Group for the Infusion of Multicultural and Global Understanding. The committee provides a way for individuals to discuss ideas and issues of diversity on Drake’s campus. The group has numerous events planned for the academic year, including a public display of submitted works of art that will be representative of multiculturalism.

These events are just one way to advance the conversation about diversity on campus. They, along with the community’s thoughtful response to this particular incident, demonstrate Drake’s deep commitment to civility and tolerance.

“It shows Drake is invested in figuring these things out, that our concern for these issues is part of who we are,” Perrine says.

Diane, ED'70, and Brent, ED'70, Slay

By Brent, ED’70, and Diane, ED’70, Slay

The late A. Bartlett Giamatti, former commissioner of Major League Baseball and former president of Yale University, said, “Civility is the core of civilization.” Given the cynicism and polarization that appears all too common today, one wonders  if we’ve collectively lost our core.

It seems that the dearth of civility in our society typically occurs in emotionally charged arenas such as politics, social issues, and religion. People feel so exceedingly passionate about these issues that they often lose any semblance of objectivity. Instead of being open to other points of view, they seek reinforcement of their own ideals and are intolerant of dissent. This resistance
to understanding maintains ignorance, heightens intolerance, and greatly contributes to incivility.

In Grand Rapids, Mich., where we live, the Kaufman Interfaith Institute at Grand Valley State University addresses incivility by facilitating interfaith understanding and acceptance through a variety of initiatives. The highlight of the institute’s programming is the triennial Jewish, Christian, Muslim Interfaith Dialogue. Held every three years, the one-day event features lectures by

prominent religious scholars who are then cross-examined by a moderator, each other, and the audience. After attending the conference in 2006, which featured Donniel Hartman, an Orthodox rabbi; Vincent Cornell, a professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies at Emory University; and James Carroll, a former Catholic priest and current columnist for The Boston Globe, we were motivated to address the declining state of civility surrounding interfaith issues in our own community. We began by inviting James Carroll into our home for a day of interfaith discussion and exploration with 50 guests of different faiths and backgrounds. This essay is a testament of our journey to promote civility in an area that easily lends itself to polarity.

Our daylong interfaith discussion group included Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and agnostics from various socio-economic backgrounds. Although we had a civil, lively, and spirited discussion about the general tenets of our different faiths, we only scratched the surface. Our time constraints and unfamiliarity with each other prevented us from delving into more sensitive issues. Therefore, several of us decided to convene a smaller group for future discussions. Our smaller group of 12, which continues to meet six years later, includes four Jews, four Muslims and four Christians. There are four Democrats, four Republicans, and four independents. One of the Jews is a rabbi, one of the Christians is a retired Presbyterian minister, and one of the Muslims is a leader in a local mosque. Additionally, we number three physicians, a university professor, a social worker, two business people, and two retirees who are community volunteers. Our group meets every other month in one of our homes on an alternating basis. We share food for sustenance and food for thought.

When we started the group we all knew it could be a challenge to maintain our civility—particularly when we started digging deeper into the issues that divide us, such as faith and politics.  Although we hold strong convictions about our own faiths, we yearn to learn more about others’. We understand that there are some issues where the differences in opinion are so severe that we must agree to disagree without much discussion. That is, in and of itself, a sort of civility.

Francis Wilhoit, the late, great professor of political science at Drake, used to pace back and forth across the front of the lecture hall in Meredith Hall, stopping at least once every minute to look at the room full of students and proclaim, “Where do you draw the line?” Civility demands that we find a place to “draw the line.” In our group we discuss and dissent without becoming divisive. We have pre-emptive rules of engagement that allow us to diffuse difficult discussions before they become hostile arguments. Being civil doesn’t mean we have to compromise our faith or our values. But it does mean we must treat each other with respect.

According to Cassandra Dahnke and Tomas Spath, co-founders of the Institute for Civility in Government, “Civility is claiming and caring for one’s identity, needs, and beliefs without degrading someone else’s in the process.” But how does one maintain civility when confronted with crude incivility?

One gentle man in our group, Aly, is a renowned pediatric oncologist who performs bone marrow transplants. Not long after 9/11, he was confronted by a young patient’s parent with the proclamation that “We should rid ourselves of all Muslims in this country.”

Aly replied, “Would you like me to leave before or after I perform your child’s bone marrow transplant?”

The good doctor was able to forgive what he could not condone in the mother’s belligerence. He understood that ignorance and fear play major roles in incivility—even on the playground. Jews
in our group have recounted numerous instances where their children have been told by classmates that they are going to hell if they don’t convert to Christianity. Such inflammatory rhetoric promotes feelings of distrust and disgust.

Despite the well-known saying, familiarity does not necessarily breed contempt. The six couples in our group have come to develop a deep sense of trust with each other. This trust has been built over time as we’ve discussed our respective beliefs and rituals. And this trust has resulted in feelings of safety and acceptance.

Over the years we’ve visited each other’s places of worship. We’ve come to know each other’s families. We respect each other’s dietary restrictions and acknowledge religious holidays. We celebrate each other’s successes and lend support in troubling times. We share in each other’s grief. We have become close friends.

As our relationships have matured, we are now able to broach subjects that were taboo early on: inerrancy of sacred texts, Middle East politics, domestic politics, and social issues. We listen but don’t condemn. We question each other in an attempt to gain understanding but try not to become judgmental of the answers. We don’t proselytize. We’ve learned how hurtful inappropriate language can be because our Jewish and Muslim friends are subjected to such language on a daily basis—language that questions their patriotism and the authenticity of their religion.

All of us have the capacity to do more to promote civility in our society. As the Irish philosopher Edmund Burke said, “No man makes a greater mistake than he who does nothing because he can only do a little.”

Our small interfaith group continues to celebrate our differences as well as acknowledge what we share in common. The late Rev. William Sloane Coffin Jr., former senior pastor of Riverside Church in New York City, was fond of saying, “As human beings, we have more in common than we do in conflict.” We collectively believe that.

Brent and Diane Slay recently established The Slay Fund for Social Justice at Drake University and were instrumental in bringing former President Jimmy Carter and Rosalynn Carter to campus as the Bucksbaum lecturers in September.

As hot banks of lights rise on this season’s presidential debates and university auditoriums are swathed in red, white, and blue, Americans ease into their sofas to watch the spectacle unfold. Not just the one playing out onstage, but also the drama as experienced through the news media, robocalls, social media, and coffeehouse chatter.

And, just as sure as representative democracy and free speech reign, there will be tense moments of incivility.

Our political landscape bears the scars from years of less-than-decorous exchanges. Sitting presidents dodge wagging fingers, shouted interruptions, and flying shoes, while candidates field personal potshots aimed at their parenting, parentage, war records, religion, and intelligence, as well as the inevitable comparisons to war criminals.

The realm of politics is just the tip of an uncivil iceberg. Rudeness crops up everywhere from grocery store parking lots to Little League games. And with today’s 24/7 news cycles, reality television, and the “wild, wild West” of the internet, bad behavior is synonymous with entertainment and often fame: The guy who stocks up on toys for charity on Black Friday just doesn’t capture as many eyeballs as the lady who pepper-sprays a fellow shopper to get a deal on an Xbox 360.

A generational shift

“At a certain level there is, indeed, such a thing as the coarsening of America,” says P.M. Forni, cofounder of The Civility Initiative at Johns Hopkins University and author of two leading books on the topic of civility. “There are many forms of kindness, deference, and respect that are not observed today the way they used to be in past centuries. So, we are in certain ways less civil than we used to be.”

At the same time, says Forni, there are new forms of deference and respect that have entered the fray to replace those that are slipping away—many of which are far more important than social niceties.

“Take the example of a pregnant woman riding a bus,” says Forni. “There may be fewer younger people who would give up their seat for her. But when that woman steps into the workplace, the number of people who take her seriously is much greater now than in my father’s generation. Today we are more respectful of people from cultural backgrounds different from our own. These are civil things.”

Giving for the sake of the city

In his best-selling book, Choosing Civility: The Twenty-Five Rules of Considerate Conduct, Forni explains how the underlying meaning
of “civility” goes much deeper than just politeness and courtesy. Derived from the Latin civitas, or city, the word speaks to the sense of civic community that emerges in civilization, a place where residents enlighten their intellect and refine social skills.

“As we are shaped by the city, we learn to give of ourselves for the sake of the city,” Forni writes. “Choosing civility means choosing
to do the right thing for others—for the ‘city.’”

Forni, who delivered a speech on the topic of civility at Drake as part of the University-sponsored Better Together—Creating Community through Civility series, describes the epiphany that prompted this celebrated Italian literature professor to dramatically shift the focus of his life’s work. One day, while lecturing on Dante’s Divine Comedy, he looked at his students and realized that he wanted them to be kind human beings even more than he wanted them to know about Dante.

“As a professor of literature, I had spent my life in the realm of the beautiful,” he adds. “At a certain point in my life, I discovered the realm of the good. To me, civility is important because it is a form of goodness. Because of this, it is not trivial.”

“A national civility disorder”

For better or worse, it’s clear that the U.S. is seeing reduced norms for so-called social niceties and an increase in the level of conflict that is considered acceptable in public discourse.

Weber Shandwick, Powell Tate, and KRC Research came together this year to survey 1,000 American adults on their attitudes toward politics and other aspects of American life. According to their Civility in America: A Nationwide Survey, 63 percent of Americans believe that incivility is a “major problem,” and nearly 71 percent believe that civility has declined in recent years.

Today’s rancorous political environment, believed a majority of survey respondents, is largely responsible for what the study termed a “national civility disorder.” Sixty-three percent of respondents who expect civility to worsen blame politicians for the decline, and 81 percent believe incivility in our government is harming America’s future.

Eighty-three percent said that a candidate’s tone or level of civility will be an important factor in the 2012 presidential election; and
only 40 percent accept incivility as an inherent part of the political process. Still, 67 percent expect the 2012 presidential election to
be uncivil.

“In government, just as in the general populace, there is a spectrum of civility,” says Scott Raecker, a member of the Iowa House of Representatives as well as executive director of Character Counts In Iowa, a grant-funded institute at Drake that’s an arm of the largest character education program in the nation. “You have to remember—it’s a representative government. Exchanges between politicians are going to end up representing who we are as a people.”

Partisan Polarization

Who we are as a people, according to recent studies, is growing more polarized.

A 2012 Pew Research poll confirmed that voter partisanship is soaring, with a growing ideological chasm between Republicans and Democrats (www.people-press.org/values). Point for point, the two political parties are more polarized than they ever have been in the 25 years that the poll has been conducted.

Backlash against this polarization may be creating a larger populace that falls somewhere in the middle. The Pew poll shows that a growing number of Americans now identify as independents (38 percent) compared to Democrats (32 percent) and Republicans (24 percent).

As much as this separation is felt among the general populace—we all know with whom we can and cannot talk politics—it is magnified in our states’ and nation’s capitals. While he’s seen bipartisan committees, bills, and friendships flourish in the legislature, Raecker has also observed that when lawmakers dine out and socialize, exchanges are increasingly divided along red and blue lines.

“It’s a whole other level of networking, and it used to be much more bipartisan than it is today,” he says, adding that laying the groundwork with these informal social contacts can come in handy when opinions differ and emotions are high.

“People are less likely to demean or deceive you if you build a relationship with them,” he says.

Life on the digital edge

Despite a growing public perception that politics is becoming less civil, Americans’ personal experiences with incivility trended in a more positive direction—with one notable exception.

According to the Civility in America survey, Americans reported slightly fewer instances of incivility on the road (60 percent), when shopping (29 percent), at work (34 percent), and in their neighborhoods (28 percent). One area did see a dramatic increase in 2012, though—incivility online doubled from 9 percent in 2011 to 18 percent this year.

Today’s age of digital communication, social media, and 24/7 news outlets brings the advantage of connectivity and immediacy. It also brings some distinct challenges.

According to recent research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, email recipients only have a 50-50 chance of correctly interpreting the tone of any given email message. Yet email recipients believe they have correctly ascertained what the sender meant 90 percent of the time. It’s likely that many a heated email war has been launched thanks to misinterpretation.

Part of the problem, says Raecker, is the speed at which technology has advanced. “How long ago was it that we wrote on walls in caves  and then were sending messages by boat?” he asks.
“This rapid advancement in technology has compressed all of this evolution of communication, and, as a result, there are people using this technology who are struggling with how to properly use these channels.”

Curbing anonymous venom

When this immediacy, access, and ease of use are combined with anonymity, it tends to bring out the worst in people and lead them to behave in ways that they wouldn’t otherwise.

“We call it ‘the veil of our monitor,’”says Amy Smit, director of communication and events for Character Counts In Iowa (www.charactercountsiniowa.com). “We’re not looking eye to eye with the people. And what happens on the internet with anonymity is the same as what we see in day-to-day exchanges. If you’re on the interstate and someone cuts you off, are you going to make a rude gesture? It’s likely that if it turned out you knew the person, you might cut them some slack.”

Bad online behavior has reached such critical mass that many newspapers, such as The Des Moines Register, have shifted their online commenting systems to require use of public identities.

Following the Register’s August 2011 move to eliminate anonymous commenting by requiring registration through the social media site Facebook, Herb Strentz, professor emeritus and former dean of Drake’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication, penned guest commentary in an independent weekly Cityview.

“Will using a Facebook ID adequately combat the major drawback of anonymity, allowing—take your pick—scurrilous, racist, sexist, vitriolic, or irresponsible comments to poison the Register website?” wrote Strentz. “The anonymity issue is national. Many newspapers are fed up with the commentary their anonymity policies facilitated, and they have taken steps to bring a measure of civility and common sense to online postings.”

According to Chris Snider, instructor of practice in multimedia journalism at Drake and a former managing editor for the digital version of the Register, the shift seems to have banished most of the uncivil exchanges on the newspaper’s site. Even so, he says, there may still be a place for anonymity.

“There are plenty of problems with anonymous commenting, and there were days that I hated it,” says Snider. “But anonymity can also bring information that wouldn’t otherwise come in, which can add news value.”

Conversations on civility

How does one pinpoint that fine, wiggly line that divides free speech and bullying or hate speech? It’s a question that plagues the media and academia alike.

Drake’s Statement of Principles dictates that students and staff should be able to discuss divergent perspectives and opinions in a civil manner that affirms the Drake community. Upholding this level of discourse is a responsibility that President David Maxwell takes seriously, even as it presents a challenge to elegantly mesh civility with free speech.

“The first amendment, particularly as it plays out in academia, is a messy freedom,” says Maxwell. “There are times when we are going to be subjected to things that we find distasteful or even repugnant. You have a right to say what you believe without punishment. But it doesn’t mean that you have the right to expect no consequence.”

In 2010, Drake partnered with several Iowa organizations to open a statewide dialogue on the importance of bringing civility back into public discourse. Drake co-sponsored the Better Together—Creating Community through Civility speaker series with Character Counts In Iowa, the Community Foundation of Greater Des Moines, and Interfaith Alliance of Iowa.

Forni spoke on Drake’s campus in January 2011 and was joined by Bill Bishop, author of The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart, and Jim Leach, chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities and former member of the U.S. House of Representatives. Nearly 1,000 people attended the series, which was also broadcast statewide on Iowa Public Television.

“The initiative focused on one of our core values—civility is very much aligned with our values as an institution,” says Maxwell. “I think we increasingly have a challenge to model the behavior we expect from our students. That’s why it’s so important to have forums like these.”

Grassroots change

Creating a shift in the overall civility of our society first begins within each individual. Come next week, when you round the grocery aisle to find a fellow shopper blocking your way while chatting loudly on a cell phone, you have choices—to respond with anger or snide passive aggression, or to display kindness in the face of rudeness.

On Nov. 6, when candidates collide at the polls, the nation will have the opportunity to make that choice on a much larger scale, influencing the civility of public discourse in the political arena.

“Right now, we’re allowing these negative campaigns to work,” says Raecker. “You have to ask yourself: If that’s what a candidate’s willing to do in a public campaign, what would they do behind closed doors? Change comes from the ballot box.”

For Ned Burmeister, bn’81, there is no end to the business day. Even as he sleeps, emails from staff members pile up from half a world away, filtering in from places such as  Malaysia, Hong Kong and India.

“This really is a 24/7 job,” he says of his role  as senior vice president and chief operating officer of Principal International, Inc.

The company, based in Des Moines, is a subsidiary of The Principal Financial Group. Spanning five continents, Principal International develops and sells pension and mutual funds in 10 countries, generating $1 out of every $6 the corporation earns. Principal is not alone in pursuing an international strategy. As U.S. companies continue to expand overseas, the ability to lead others at a distance, known as virtual leadership, is crucial.

Virtual leadership represents just how dramatically the practice of leadership in America has been transformed in recent years. Due to rapid social change, leaders now face situations that did not exist a mere 20 years ago and must rely upon a new skillset to help them meet the challenges of an ever-evolving world.

Burmeister is well aware of these issues. As chief operating officer, he monitors the performance of Principal’s international companies and ensures they have the resources and expertise they need for daily operations. This includes the management of numerous individuals working overseas.

The biggest challenge in his job, Burmeister says, is communicating effectively because  electronic communications, such as phone and email, take away many of the nonverbal clues that are important to understanding human interactions. In addition, he says, the distance has required him to learn new techniques and adapt to new styles of leadership.

“It’s hard to learn and accept the fact that you have to let go, you have to trust the people working for you,” he says. “Your first responsibility is to hire good people overseas. At the end of the day, you have to trust those people because you can’t run every aspect of those businesses from Des Moines. You have to get comfortable and realize you don’t need to know what is happening on a day-to-day basis.”

And, he adds, “You have to learn to sleep on an airplane.”

A new way of thinking

Though virtual leadership is a relatively new development, the practice of leadership has been changing for some time. Today, leadership is more equitable, collaborative and increasingly focused on engagement and communication — a sharp contrast to old models of command and control. This shift began more than 100 years ago, as America began the slow march from manufacturing and agriculture to a knowledge and service-based economy.

The command and control style of leadership was epitomized in Harry Truman’s iconic desktop sign: The Buck Stops Here. In a world of factory production and assembly lines, orders came from the top. Leaders made decisions and only their opinions mattered. With this came the idea that leaders must be smarter, more charismatic and, interestingly enough, even taller than the average man. It was believed leaders were born, preordained for greatness.

No more. Greater access to education, an increasingly globalized world and the rapid progression of technology have changed the way leadership is viewed and practiced in the United States — and one of the first conventions cast aside was the idea that individuals can lead with an iron fist. Because America’s workforce is now the most educated in history, employees bring skills and expertise to the table that their leaders may not possess. Thus, individuals expect to take ownership of their own work and want their leaders to guide  instead of direct.

“No longer can one person by edict dictate where we need to go,” says Tom Westbrook, professor of education, who teaches master’s-level leadership courses in the School of Education and serves as chair of the undergraduate concentration in leadership education and development. “There is automatic pushback on that. So leadership is more about language, our ability to engage and our ability to get buy-in.”

Establishing a vision

The ability to get buy-in from others is critical. A huge part of a leader’s success derives from inspiring others to rally around a common goal that extends beyond the completion of day-to-day tasks. In a world of constant fluctuation, leaders must not just cope with change but drive it. While top-level managers and CEOs often lead this type of change, innovation can occur at all levels of an organization, expanding the practice of leadership to any individual who can shift conventional thinking and convince others to believe in a vision.

“The myth of leadership is that it must come from a public or political leader, the captain of the football team or the student body president,” says Westbrook. “But when you think about it, Einstein was a leading physicist; Picasso, a leading painter; and Martha Graham a leader in ushering in the realm of modern dance. If you think about all those people, they were leaders because they assisted us in thinking differently about their domain.”

The need for innovation is being seen in every field from business to the sciences. In the fields of pharmacy and health care, rising costs, longer life spans and a proliferation of prescription medications have led to a demand for new ideas.

“It has always been important for there to be people to invent new solutions — but now it is to the point where there need to be more than a few people doing great things,” says Renae Chesnut, professor of pharmacy practice and associate dean for student affairs in Drake’s College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences (CPHS).

According to Chesnut, who recently completed her term as president of the Iowa Pharmacy Association, pharmacists are beginning to embrace the idea of entrepreneurial leadership. The movement is based on the belief that every pharmacist must work to improve patient care by identifying potential problems and coming up with creative solutions that are economically viable.

“The idea of entrepreneurial leadership is about instilling the mind-set that every individual, no matter what position that person has within an organization, needs to be looking for ways to improve the process, product or service to create a better environment for patients,” she says.

Faculty members in the CPHS encourage both pharmacy students and health science majors to be leaders in their fields. In addition to courses on entrepreneurial leadership and management, the CPHS offers the Student Leadership Development Series, which brings in guest speakers and gives students the opportunity to enhance their understanding of leadership through monthly activities. Through the DELTA Rx Institute, a Drake organization whose mission is to promote “the spirit of change and innovation” within the field of pharmacy, the college offers the Next Top Entrepreneur Competition, which encourages the development of original ideas to solve problems in health care.

Building relationships

While a knack for ingenuity is important, the abilities to communicate that vision and to relate to others are equally valuable qualities in a leader.

Because so much of leadership today is focused on collaboration, leaders must be able to gain trust and form sincere relationships. Leaders must also serve as mentors, empowering those around them and helping others to accomplish their own goals.

“Some define leadership simply as a relationship building process,” says Ina Purvanova, assistant professor of management and international business.
“If you can’t build a positive relationship with someone, how are you supposed to do your job as a leader, which is to influence others and motivate them to do a good job?”

She adds that these behaviors are important because they get to the heart of what the majority of people desire from life.

“If you really look at these behaviors, each one satisfies a primal need that humans tend to have: the need for relationships, to grow and to learn, and the need to know why. Once those needs are satisfied, people are more able and willing to go above and beyond and really contribute to their organization.”

Learning to lead

Purvanova is quick to dispel the notion that leaders are born and instead says anyone can develop the characteristics necessary to lead in the 21st century.

“One of the things that research continues to uncover is that our personalities are quite malleable,” says Purvanova. “What that means is that we can learn to acquire traits we may not have initially possessed, and conversely, we can put aside some of the traits that are not our best. We can get rid of bad habits, essentially, because we evolve. We learn all the time.”

At Drake, the emphasis on liberal arts is central to leadership development. In addition to the ability to build relationships and communicate a vision, leaders today must navigate ambiguous situations and make ethical decisions when answers aren’t clear-cut. They must be flexible enough to thrive in a time of great uncertainty. Numerous courses in the Drake Curriculum are focused on helping students grow these capabilities.

“The whole notion of a liberal arts education is that it prompts us to think critically and analytically, to be able to solve problems, to be able to express ourselves and write coherently — those are crucial elements of leadership,” says Westbrook.

While the knowledge and skills gained through coursework are important, learning to apply these lessons is equally so. Students practice leadership skills during internships, through volunteer activities and by participating in campus organizations. Drake’s Donald V. Adams Leadership Institute helps students connect the theory they’ve learned in classes to their experiences outside of the classroom. In the past few years, Drake has expanded its leadership offerings for students. The Athletics Strategic Plan calls for enhanced leadership-based experiences for student-athletes, and a new leadership concentration emphasizes experiential learning combined with self-reflection to help students better understand their talents.

Self-reflection is also a focus in the graduate and undergraduate courses Purvanova teaches on leadership in the College of Business and Public Administration. In both courses, she stresses self-awareness through a series of personality surveys that allow her students to understand how they and others see themselves. Both Purvanova and Westbrook agree that self-awareness is a necessary first step in learning to lead with emotional intelligence — a determinant in a leader’s ability to relate to others.

“You cannot get better at this notion of leading with emotional intelligence until you can get better at understanding yourself,” says Westbrook. “If we can begin to develop around those aspects — Who am I? What value do I bring? What assumptions do I have? — we can begin to understand others’ stories, values and what they bring to the table. That’s really what self-awareness is. It’s the whole notion of who I am within the context of Drake or my major or the world.”

Future challenges

Once individuals are aware of how their own values and beliefs shape their worldview, they can gain a greater appreciation for the backgrounds of coworkers and clients they will encounter in today’s diverse workplace. Globalization brings with it new difficulties when dealing with unfamiliar cultures and operating on other continents, and this challenge will only continue to grow as more U.S. companies expand internationally and technology continues to improve.

While much is known about what Americans expect in their leaders, Purvanova says it is not always clear what the expectations are from people in other parts of the world.

“It is extremely important as companies expand overseas for leaders to ask, ‘Do I need to adjust or learn a new set of behaviors if I am going on a business trip to China?’” she says.

Burmeister agrees with Purvanova, saying in his experience at Principal International, he discovered that views of leadership vary slightly between countries, requiring some adaptability.

“As you first get into the international game, I think there is a learning curve for working with other cultures, so you need to understand the cultural differences and understand that what is right and appropriate in the U.S. isn’t always right and appropriate in other countries. Understanding how they view the relationship between managers and employees is important,” he says.

However, Burmeister also believes if individuals approach leadership with an open and inquisitive mind, those differences are easily overcome. He adds that the benefits of operating outside the United States outweigh any challenges presented by distance or culture.

“The U.S. operation has benefited greatly from product development and from ideas outside the U.S.,” he says. “It’s a two-way street of information flow,
at least for Principal.”

As American organizations continue to expand into countries around the world, the field of leadership is likely to keep evolving, says Purvanova. Because of the increased need for understanding of leadership in cultures throughout the world, she expects much more research to be conducted in this area moving forward.

Studies by the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Research Program, which is based at New Mexico State University and connects researchers in more than 60 cultures, are already making strides in this area. The organization’s research has shown that, despite different cultural expectations for how leaders should act and motivate their followers, there are some traits that are universally valued. At the top of the list are honesty and integrity, demonstrating that trust is essential, whether leadership is occurring virtually, in person or from within a field or organization.

“Researchers are actually finding a tremendous amount of consistency across the world, and I think this makes sense because no matter what culture you live in, you probably don’t like people to lie to you,” Purvanova says. “While some of the behaviors may differ between countries, leaders still need a common set of characteristics to be successful.”

— Elizabeth Ford Kozor, AS, JO’07 | Illustrations by Drew Albinson, Class of 2013

Ian Weller, Class of 2012

Graduation. Completion. In a few short weeks, I’ll transfer the tassel on my graduation cap from right to left and throw the hat in the air; then my friends, family and I will celebrate the joyous end of an era.

Then I’ll start doing push-ups.
Lots of push-ups. 

While my friends may take the summer off before going on to pursue graduate school and careers in actuarial science, education and music, I will be enrolled in the U.S. Navy’s Officer Candidate School. And through what I’m sure will seem like an extreme amount of push-ups, morning runs and verbal abuse, I’ll be broken down. Then I’ll gradually be built back up in preparation for my second graduation. Graduation from the U.S. Navy’s Officer Candidate School comes with more than a promise of adventure; it also comes with the commitment to service, sacrifice and an allegiance to the core values of honor and courage.

At 22 years old, I will be stationed as a Surface Warfare Officer aboard a warship and will be legally and morally responsible for new sailors fresh out of high school. When I consider what I’m about to do, a host of emotions well up: nervousness, pride, excitement and an aggressive confidence. I think the confidence comes from feeling prepared — for this, I credit my leadership experiences at Drake.

While attending Drake, I have been blessed with numerous leadership opportunities: some on campus and others halfway around the world. Although I consider my experiences pretty extraordinary, I’ve concluded that almost every cocurricular activity is a learning lab in leadership. From day one, first-year students join organizations led by older students. We watch these leaders and learn what to emulate and what to improve upon as we develop our own leadership skills. In some cases, students gain experience planning major events and managing large budgets for their student organizations. In other cases, students make miracles happen simply through their ability to influence others. In both examples, students are learning some exceptional leadership skills.

For me, the highlights of my leadership experiences at Drake were being elected as founding president when Pi Kappa Phi fraternity returned to campus, serving as a resident assistant (R.A.) in Crawford Residence Hall, helping to lead an evacuation from Egypt and starting a military career with the U.S. Navy. Each of these experiences has taught me something valuable that I’ll bring to my next position as a new Navy officer and to other leadership roles that will follow.

When my colleagues and I restarted the Pi Kappa Phi fraternity, we made mistakes as well as celebrated success. From this I learned the importance of being surrounded by people who

support you and who are working toward a common goal. The men who were by my side have a special place in my heart, and it is an honor to call them “brother.” It is an even bigger honor and point of pride to see what the fraternity has grown into. The best organizations look to the future. My brothers and I did this by keeping our vision for future generations of Pi Kapps at the forefront while we revitalized  the chapter. This motivation toward the future is common in many students at Drake and was recently summed up by my roommate Seejo Valacheril, Class of 2012, who said, “We want to make sure we leave Drake a better place than when we started.”

The goal of many leaders is to make themselves more or less replaceable  — or at least not always needed. I quickly saw the value in this when I was an R.A. in Crawford Residence Hall. It was move-in day and it seemed every first-year student needed my attention. My favorite memory is of one student who asked me what time curfew was. I couldn’t believe he was actually asking me when he should return to his room every night, so I sarcastically told him, “When the streetlights turn on.” Within two weeks, however, this student and all the others on my floor were taking control of their social programs, floor issues and even staying out past dark. I hope my sailors will be up to the same task.

When I was a junior at Drake, I learned several skills directly related to my future position as a U.S. Navy officer. As an international relations major and study-abroad student, I traveled the Middle East and honed my Arabic language skills. And although I never saw combat, my study-abroad experience allowed me (although inadvertently) to be close.

Having fallen in love with the land of the pharaohs during a short trip to Egypt with Mahmoud Hamad, assistant professor of politics, in summer 2010, I returned a year later for an entire semester. In spring 2011, I participated in a study-abroad program in Alexandria, a city in northern Egypt. After being there a short while, the Egyptian uprising began: I witnessed protests on a massive scale, drove by the riot police engaged in an alley, witnessed gunfire below my balcony, and in the mornings saw burned cars after evenings of rage. As I climbed onto my roof one night, I was overcome with tear gas — the government response to the Arab Spring. During a very long and at times frightening evacuation (over 36 hours from the “get your gear, and get going” call to leaving Egyptian airspace) I helped coordinate evacuation efforts and worked hard to maintain morale, minimize panic and keep my fellow students sane throughout the tumult.

Finally, one of my most recent leadership experiences at Drake is also one of the best — my time with the Army ROTC. Before joining, my only brush with the military was hearing stories about my grandparents’ service. Especially memorable is a story about my grandmother, who was stationed as an Army captain at Schofield Barracks overlooking Pearl Harbor on that fateful December Sunday. So when I trained with the ROTC as a noncontracted cadet, I wasn’t sure what to expect. What I found were exemplary students, many of whom had already seen combat. These men and women were living out their personal values and holding themselves to the highest
standards. They were practicing the tenets of leadership
I hope to bring to my next position.

As I’ve been preparing for my next step in life, I’ve taken some time to reflect on my college experience (the importance of reflection is something I learned at Drake). In doing so, I’ve realized that Drake not only taught me about leadership but also allowed me to experience and practice it. From the fraternity chapter room to the sands of a revolutionary Egypt and to whereever the waters of Naval warfare may lead me, I have been eternally blessed. Great leaders have shaped me, and with a Bulldog pennant stowed in my sea bag, I pledge to continue the tradition.

— Ian Weller, Class of 2012

Mary Carpenter, the namesake of Carpenter Hall and the daughter of Drake founder George Carpenter, was one of the first female leaders at Drake University. She served as the University librarian, a residence hall administrator and as the first dean of women in the early days of the 20th century.

When students formed a female basketball team in 1905, rules stipulated that players wear full blouses with puffy sleeves and pleated bloomers that snapped below the knee.

Even with this restrictive dress code, however, Carpenter declared the sport inappropriate for women and banned the team. She was also so dismayed by the “unladylike behavior” of women at football games that she decreed female students were no longer permitted to yell for their team — though they were free to express their excitement for the game by singing aloud.

Fast-forward more than 100 years: The role of women at Drake would be unimaginable to Carpenter.

Drake now has in Sandy Hatfield Clubb a female athletic director who oversees all aspects of University sports, and women at Drake serve in leadership roles across campus.

Among these leaders is the trifecta of Interim Provost Susan Wright, Vice Provost for Student Affairs and Academic Excellence Wanda Everage, and Vice President for Business and Finance Vicky Payseur. Combined, these women have provided more than 75 years of service to Drake.

Though their leadership will be missed, as Everage and Payseur will retire in May and Wright plans to retire by the end of the 2013 academic year, their insight and experiences should serve to inspire and educate future leaders for many decades to come.

“All three of them are so much a part of what Drake is, has been and will be,” says Drake President David Maxwell. “Each of them is blazingly smart, but with very different cognitive styles and affect. We can’t replace any of them — we’re appointing their successors.”

Wanda Everage

As a student at Drake from 1968–72, Wanda Everage never served in a school-sponsored leadership role.

“I wasn’t in an official, university-sanctioned role as a leader,” she says. “But I was involved and part of a grassroots movement dealing with equality.”

This experience greatly influenced Everage and encouraged her to help others become leaders — regardless of their job, status or position.

“This whole notion of Drake creating leaders through official programs is great, but we have to ask how we can empower people to be great leaders from where they are,” she says. “As people in endorsed senior leadership positions, it is our responsibility to empower people to lead and gain the confidence to understand their own potential.”

After graduating, Everage served as a teacher and administrator in the Des Moines Public School District and was one of only five governor-appointed members of the Iowa Board of Parole.

When she returned to Drake in 1988 as the University’s first assistant to the provost, Everage learned that retention of students was a serious problem. The provost at the time simply told her “fix it.” There was little guidance as to how to go about solving the problem, just a faith in her ability to get it done and a willingness to let her lead the project.

This trust, she says, truly inspired her to succeed and is a prime example of how to encourage leadership.

“It’s not always easy to help others realize their potential, but empowering people to trust themselves that they are giving their best is the most  challenging and rewarding aspect of my job,” says Everage.

“Wanda is an icon of the very best of Drake University,” says Maxwell. “As an alumna and as a senior administrator, she has managed to combine in important ways the perspectives and values of the institution with a personal understanding of the student experience. Wanda’s ultimate impact on Drake is the effect she’s had on thousands of students and her colleagues through personal interactions — challenging them with high standards and helping them achieve their goals.”

Sue Wright

Before coming to Drake in 1975 as an assistant professor of sociology, Sue Wright served as an instructor at a small liberal arts college in Virginia. Though she held the same position as a male who was hired at the same time, she earned only two-thirds of his salary and was required to adhere to a dress code in place for all women.

“At a time when students across the country were protesting the Vietnam War and fighting for civil rights, students at this college were protesting dress codes,” she recalls. “I was fired because they were convinced I instigated students to protest, though I did not.”

With her more than 37 years of service at Drake, one might assume that Wright has mastered the arts of keeping quiet and shying away from controversy — but nothing could be further from the truth.

“I hold the philosophy that as part of a community you should be involved to make it as good as it can be,” says Wright. “I’ve always been outspoken. My approach has consistently been to challenge from within.”

In the mid-80s the College of Arts and Sciences invited Drake trustees to a meeting. Faculty talked about college accomplishments and Wright discussed faculty salaries. One board member left the meeting as she spoke and the incoming president of the board told her afterward that if she were his employee he would fire her on the spot. He admitted however, that he was still trying to understand the role of faculty and shared governance.

Since then, Wright has served as department chair, dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, associate provost and director of institutional research, deputy provost and interim provost, and will return to the role of deputy provost in June 2012.

“I think that’s one of the very good things about Drake,” says Wright. “I’ve always felt free to speak my mind even before I was tenured. There are many different ways in which an individual can help an organization move forward and achieve goals.”

“I am very grateful to Sue for stepping up to fulfill a number of vital leadership roles at Drake,” says Maxwell. “With her decades of experience, her wealth of knowledge about the institution in particular and higher education in general, and her wise and thoughtful understanding of academic culture and practice, she is an invaluable asset to the University.”

Vicky Payseur

Since arriving at Drake in 1997, Vice President for Business and Finance Vicky Payseur has played a key role in guiding the University through a difficult economic climate and ensuring that financial stability has become both a reality and an ongoing goal.

“I’m really proud of the fact that we’ve had a balanced budget for eight years and that I’ve had the opportunity to lead so many campus improvement projects that have enhanced the student experience” says Payseur. “Getting the University to this point, however, has not been easy.

“It takes a lot of courage to be in this role,” she says. “It is not a position for the weak willed. It’s hard to be the one who says no. To be businesslike in an academic setting can be considered negative. There tends to be a feeling that those of us dealing with finances are not as mission driven, but I’ve always tried to do  everything I can to keep the mission up front and to support students.”

“Vicky has the breadth of vision and understanding of institutional mission to know that the balance sheet is not the ultimate metric of success,” says Maxwell. “It’s maximizing our resources to ensure that we fulfill our promise of an exceptional learning environment.”

Payseur has served as a leader in the professional world since 1982, including stints as vice president at Des Moines University and as the first female vice president at Simpson College before coming to Drake in 1997.

She believes that opportunities for women to lead now exist on a level equal to those available to men. Additionally, Payseur says, the presence of so
many female leaders at Drake — vice presidents, provosts, deans and others — demonstrates to young women on campus that gender discrimination is no longer the major issue it used to be.

“Leaders need to have clarity of purpose and creativity, and I don’t think either gender has a lock on that,” she says.

New Shoes

While, as Payseur suggests, neither men nor women may have a unique leadership advantage based solely on gender, Drake has certainly come to rely upon the leadership skills of these women — and many others. If Mary Carpenter were with us today, she would probably lie  awake at night worrying about the influence that today’s women have on students. But the role of women and their sphere of influence continues to grow at Drake — and will continue for the foreseeable future.

Maxwell points to the many women in leadership roles on the Drake campus — vice president for business and finance (current and future); interim provost and future provost; vice provost and deputy provost; chief information technology officer; two of the five academic deans; a number of directors (including athletics and human resources); and department chairs — as evidence that the University has and will continue to rely on women to lead the way.

“We don’t expect anyone to fill Vicky’s, Wanda’s or Sue’s shoes — we expect their successors to bring their own shoes,” says Maxwell.

— Tim Schmitt, GR’08, ’10

Last fall, the Academy for a Healthy Iowa presented Drake University the “Healthy Iowa College/University Award,” recognizing a long-term, strategic commitment to physical, mental and emotional health on campus.  This month, Drake unveils its newest brick in the wellness wall: Underground Fitness.

A brand new addition to the Olmsted Center, Underground Fitness will provide a free and convenient exercise resource for students. The center fills an unused space of the former Terrace Court dining hall, breathing new life into the bottom floor of Olmsted and alleviating pressure on the university’s Bell Center recreation facility.

“I think it’s a great addition to the Olmsted Center,” says Doug Brady, a sophomore marketing and accounting major. “Not only is the new facility more convenient and accessible to the student population living in dorms, it also eases the demand for cardio equipment in the Bell Center. As the temperature drops, the need for these indoor fitness facilities increases exponentially.”

Underground Fitness, and the award that preceded it, reflect a broad movement toward wellness at Drake. Jana Peterson, the University’s wellness director, points to a combination of senior-level administrative support and campus community participation as integral contributors to the award.

“The inclusion of creating a culture of wellness as part of the strategic plan was instrumental in receiving this title,” Peterson says. “Drake wellness also works with a community that participates. Without engagement from the campus community, this recognition would not be possible.”

Beyond the body

Over the past several years, broad changes have bolstered the University’s commitment not only to physical health, but also to mental and emotional wellness. New policies, such as community service leave for employees, aim to improve the balance between work and life. New positions such as the coordinator of student wellness education and the coordinator for sexual violence response and healthy relationship promotion enhance the student experience. Free programming —including one-on-one fitness testing, exercise program design consultations, a wellness lunch series and group exercise classes — also contributes to the success of Drake’s efforts to foster healthy lifestyles.

Drake’s Athletics Department has prepared a new concept for expanding and revitalizing the university’s existing sports and recreation facilities. Fundraising has begun with the goal of completing construction in the next few years. The plan would provide vastly superior workout space for Drake students, Drake athletes, and professional track and field competitors alike.

Recognizing the commitment

Initiatives like these have proven popular: 89 percent of Drake employees participate in at least one wellness program offering each year, and the “Healthy Iowa” designation is well-deserved recognition.

The Academy for a Healthy Iowa is a collaboration between the Iowa Department of Public Health, the Governor’s Council on Physical Fitness and Nutrition and the Wellness Council of Iowa. Award winners are selected based on providing access to wellness programming, financial commitment, measurability and sustainability. Winners retain the “Healthy Iowa” designation for three years, at which point they must reapply.

Drake University was recognized at the Healthy Iowa Awards held on October 20 at the Hy-Vee Conference Center in West Des Moines. Eleven Iowa businesses were designated Wellness Council of America “Well Workplaces,” and 13 communities, schools and leaders were recognized.

Peterson anticipates integrating ideas from the Healthy Iowa Conference into future wellness initiatives. Each academic year, Drake Wellness offers a new program designed by its staff.

“I am looking forward to creating and implementing programming for the Drake campus based on new research and ideas presented at the conference,” she says.