If you’re like what I imagine to be the typical Campus Progress reader – a politically-conscious student engaged in important issues on campus – Inside Higher Ed’s series on “students and campus leadership” is worth a peek. One of the articles is by Justin Elliott, a 2007 Brown grad whose article on university ties to slavery ran on CampusProgress.org.

Elliot writes about what the role of a university president should be – to be a presence on campus, engage students and challenge them “intellectually, morally, or politically.” He charges that Brown’s president, Ruth Simmons, failed to do any of the above. Elliot’s claims may surprise many students at Brown where she enjoys an 81 percent approval rating according to the Brown Daily Herald and a reputation as “a power women” who “makes people feel empowered. Students even made a video tribute to her:

His comments may also shock outside observers who have come to know Simmons through national media coverage of her role in investigating Brown’s historical ties to slavery.

Elliot recognizes Simmons’ absence on campus is probably not unique among presidents of major universities. He offers some recommendations for how presidents can play a more meaningful role in students’ lives, calling for them to weigh in on “pressing political questions of the day.”

I see where Elliot’s coming from. Universities should keep an eye on what’s going on outside the ivory tower of academia and faculty should make their views known on various policies, especially those in their fields of expertise. But I hesitate to call for university presidents to take a public stand, say, on the war in Iraq. While I personally would love to see presidents lead a national charge to end the war and bring our troops home, I think this would hopelessly politicize academia. If a university president is speaking on a panel or in a forum with students, he or she should make his or her personal views known. But I don’t want my school’s president making institutional pronouncements on my behalf when I (not to mention thousands of other students and faculty) might disagree.

Regardless of whether university presidents speak out on political issues, Elliot’s dreams of seeing university presidents make engaging students their first priority will not be realized any time soon. Presidents at small liberal arts colleges or other tiny schools might dine with students several times a week, but university presidents are generally focused on one thing: raising money. I actually don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. We need to invest in higher education and we need presidents reminding that to folks with money. You can gripe about schools raising money merely for the purpose of having it – every year Yale spends 5 percent of its endowment, currently worth $18 billion, which grows 20 percent annually from investment returns – but if presidents didn’t spend their time getting donors to pony up, financial aid at most institutions would be even worse than it is. Indeed, it’s alumni donations that pay little Tre’s scholarship.

While we're on Brown, I highly encourage anyone with 49 minutes and 24 seconds to watch this film on student government elections at Brown. The one candidate (you'll know who I'm talking about) IS Karl Rove! Plus, you can't miss out on the unicorn dance! Want to know about the sex scandals?! You'll just have to watch and find out for yourself: