Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of The Chronicle's archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query. You can also try a Basic search
12 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
Once again, Duke University is beset by issues rooted in the history of our country—and our own university. At this moment, we are not dealing well with the issues of race and diversity. The key question is why? Where have we come from and where should we go?
Few themes dramatize the challenges of the 21st-century better than human rights.
Although the American Constitution begins with the words “We the People,” and the Declaration of Independence declares that “all men are created equal,” our history has largely contradicted those ideals. Indeed, today’s level of economic inequality is greater than it has ever been since the Great Depression, according to Pew Research Center. Although significant progress has occurred over the last century, recent developments highlight the degree to which we are moving backward as much as we are moving forward.
Sex and race have been intertwined since the beginning of American history. They remain so today, throughout America and here at Duke. The events that occurred on Buchanan Boulevard two weeks ago are part of a deep and troubling history.
Today is the 40th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have a Dream Speech" at the March on Washington. In the decades since, it has become customary for politicians and commentators to celebrate King's commitment to the American Dream, his belief in equal opportunity, and his hope that one day, the children of black and white families might be judged "not by the color of their skin," but by "the content of their character."
We are writing about the series of articles and editorials that appeared in The Chronicle this past week about the biological anthropology and anatomy department. Our intention is to clarify the history of deliberations on BAA, the procedures that we have followed, and our understanding of how the process will unfold. While individual views on proposals for restructuring BAA may differ, we hope that this narrative will dispel misunderstandings about the substance and process of our actions.
In his letter of Oct. 31, Professor Roy Weintraub argues that Duke's commitment to diversity in its faculty is at odds with the pursuit of excellence. I believe that diversity enhances our quality rather than diminishes it. Among those faculty we have recruited as part of our commitment to diversity are winners of the Pulitzer Prize, Guggenheim Fellowships, and major book and scientific awards. They have held important offices in prestigious scholarly organizations, and have come from institutions like Northwestern, Princeton, Columbia and Penn. This is not an either/or objective: diversity or excellence. Rather it is pursuit of both--and I believe we have demonstrated success in that pursuit.
The Chronicle's Oct. 12 headline stating that the Arts and Sciences budget Task Force had endorsed a cut of 50 faculty members to deal with projected Arts and Sciences deficits is misleading. It also does an injustice to the balanced and far-reaching assessment of the task force chaired by Professor Phil Cook. In its careful study, the Cook task force enumerated various "levers" available to cut the projected shortfalls: tuition increases higher than in previous years; reductions in the raise pool for faculty salaries; trimming faculty searches by five per year for the next four years; and possible increases in federal grant returns, new master's programs and expanded continuing education programs.
The Chronicle's Feb. 27 article on Duke's progress on the strategic plan contained one sentence that is misleading regarding Arts and Sciences. It states that I have asked a budget task force to "look at ways to balance [the] budget--including a cut in either faculty salaries or the number of hires." I have never suggested a cut in salaries, nor have I ever suggested cutting faculty slots--one possible interpretation of your wording. In my September speech to the Arts and Sciences Council and in my charge to the budget task force, I did say that in light of anticipated deficits over the next few years, some hard choices would have to be made, for example between a continued increase in faculty slots--which have grown by 46 percent in the last six years--higher than average salary increases, continued expansion of support for graduate students and further increases in research support. In short, out budgetary situation compels us to make trade-offs. We cannot have everything. But I never have and never would suggest a cut in salaries or reducing the existing size of our faculty. We will continue our quest for excellence--within parameters that recognize budgetary restraints.
This is a season for reflection, about ultimate matters of concern for those of us who are of the Jewish or Christian faith, about immediate issues of respect and disrespect for students at Duke, about larger issues of equality and discrimination in our society as a whole. They all come together, historically and in our daily lives, in this moment.
Just two brief comments on The Chronicle's editorial entitled "High-Speed Merger?" regarding the task force to restructure our biology program. First, in 1996, as you know, an internal task force-including five members from the botany and zoology departments-deliberated for a year and unanimously concluded that a merger was, intellectually and structurally, the best course to adopt. This past year, an external review of the program by nationally known experts emphatically and unanimously endorsed the same conclusion. For us not to proceed with the current task force would be an act of procrastination well worthy of The Chronicle's criticism. To proceed with it seems both orderly and deliberate.
Recently, a number of writers to this paper have criticized Duke University for failing to honor former President Richard Nixon, and in particular, for not providing a home for the Nixon Presidential Library.
