Such considerations of race and gender raise many questions about the selection process. For one thing, there is the concern that the selection committee may give preference to candidates based solely on their race or gender. While we support keeping the field of candidates as open and diverse as possible, even advertising the vacant position in journals that cater specifically to minority groups, the fact that the issue was brought up at all may ultimately result in a president who arrives on campus with an image already tarnished by a public perception that he or she received the job because of gender or race.
Already, it is unfortunate that, of all the qualities a search committee might look for in a new president, gender and race are the only "qualifications" that have been at all talked about so far around the proverbial water cooler. If the College needed a fundraiser, for example, at least the College community might have an idea of what types of candidates would suit the presidency best. Right now, many on campus do not know what type of president we are looking for; all we know is what that president should not look like.
Race and gender should only become qualifications when the candidate can show that his or her race or gender is beneficial in healing divides or otherwise bettering the College. The most important thing that the committee should focus on is a candidate's credentials-and we recognize that race and gender are not always excluded from that category.
More important than advancing diversity merely by choosing a president who comes from a race and/or gender that is underrepresented in the College's past is to endorse a leader who has demonstrated a history of diversity in his/her experiences and accomplishments.