I’m pretty excited about the Presidential Search Committee’s decision. Their candidate, Marvin Krislov, University of Michigan VP and General Counsel, has an impressive resume, one that seems in some ways like a natural path towards Oberlin College.  He has degrees from Yale and Oxford. He spent a few years working in the Department of Labor under President Clinton; his most notable accomplishment was his role in successfully defending the University of Michigan’s affirmative action admission processes before the Supreme Court in 2003. But this impressive list of credentials does not mean that  Krislov understands everything about Oberlin or is entirely prepared to become our college’s president. There are a few things that he should remember as he plans to take the position this fall.

     Krislov has a well-proven record of being committed to diversity. As a freshman at Yale he won a debate competition in which he defended affirmative action and he later won a similar debate competition in front of the Court. But affirmative action is not the only mechanism for creating a diverse community at a school like Oberlin.

    In 1994 Oberlin College put an end to its policy of need-blind admissions. This policy admitted students without knowledge of their financial need and then provided aid for them after admission. Now Oberlin uses what is called a need-sensitive admissions policy, in which it considers the financial situation of applicants when making admissions decisions. As VP of Finance Andy Evans said in 1994, “We are only asking to take the one that can afford to pay rather than the one that cannot afford to pay. It’s really crass, but that’s what we have to do,” according to an Review article from that year.

    This isn’t only crass; it’s exclusionary. A need-sensitive policy decreases the socioeconomic diversity of Oberlin. I hope that our new president, with his demonstrated passion for diversity in academic communities, will do his best to reverse the 1994 decision and restore Oberlin’s need-blind policy. This, along with the affirmative action policies that  Krislov defends, will help to create a more heterogeneous Oberlin, which the University of Michigan argued in the 2003 Court case is of serious educational value.

    But Oberlin is concerned with more than diversity. We are also committed to environmental sustainability. The campus has made great strides in this area, and I hope that  Krislov will continue to keep us on this path. Homosexual and transgender rights are also important issues to many Oberlin students and faculty. And I am a little apprehensive about  Krislov’s qualifications to be president of a conservatory of music or to be the administrator of Oberlin’s vast arts programs. I hope that  Krislov consider these issues in his presidency as well.

    I am not saying these things under the assumption that he won’t. At the student forum on Thursday night,  Krislov spoke supportively about environmental sustainability, health care and the arts. And his career record suggests that he is committed to a variety of causes. He worked in the Civil Rights division of the Department of Justice under President Clinton, prosecuting those charged with racial and religious violence and police brutality. He has written scholarly articles for legal journals about tenants’ rights. He appears to take social justice issues very seriously, which is part of why the Presidential Search Committee decided that he was the best candidate for the job. I just hope that when he comes to Oberlin next Fall,  Krislov continues this commitment in ways that include, but also go far beyond his deep commitment to affirmative action. commitment to affirmative action.