Online Edition | Washington State University | Pullman, Washington | Friday, January 11, 2002

Parting words
Hopkins compares presidents, offers suggestion for future
By Robert Frank, WSU Today


Ron Hopkins, interim provost, 
takes a moment to discuss WSU’s future 
(Photo by Bob Hubner, WSU Photo Services)

Ron Hopkins stepped down as WSU’s provost in mid-December, marking his third departure from WSU, his second term as interim provost and his second retirement. For most administrators, one stint as provost is a career highlight. Hopkins takes with him a great deal of history and wisdom, having served as a professor, department chair, vice provost, and as interim provost under three WSU presidents.

Interested in gathering a few of his parting comments, WSU Today caught Hopkins Dec. 15 as he was tying up a few details and preparing his office for his successor, Robert Bates, who is scheduled to officially take office on Friday, Feb. 1.

Q: Having served as provost several times, do you find there are any advantages to being the interim provost?
Hopkins: There’s always the advantage of knowing there is an end. By the same token, I’ve tried to take the long-term view and act as though I were going to be here forever ... while joking that I wouldn’t.

The president and other people treated me like I was a real provost, letting me make the real decisions.

Normally there would be a disadvantage to being an interim provost. I think it was a little bit easier this time around, primarily since I had more experience, but partly because I had been gone awhile and had the advantage of surprise. When Lane brought me back, I wasn’t the only one who was surprised.

It’s different coming from the inside, rather than coming from the outside, for an interim appointment.

Q: You worked for three different presidents. How would you compare them and their styles?
Hopkins: Glenn Terrell was a very student-oriented president. He knew a lot of students by name and he deliberately walked across campus every day so that he could be out among the people. He was also a very Pullman-oriented president. I don’t think his presidency involved as much travel as it does now.

I don’t know a great deal about Glenn’s style. He met on a regular basis with research-oriented faculty, in which I was involved. That kind of irritated some of the other faculty, but it was an important transition time, in which we were trying to improve the university’s research stature.

Sam Smith was quite gregarious but spent more time off campus. He was the one who initiated the branch campus concept and put a lot of emphasis on outreach. Sam had a strong preference for ambiguity, in that he liked to be a bit unclear about who was in charge of what or how decisions were to be made. I think that was a deliberate strategy on his part. It’s hard to describe without seeming to be critical, and that’s not my intent. I think it’s fair to say, he was not a particularly hands-on president and did not manage the university in a traditional style.

Sam began an emphasis of casting WSU in the role of a "virtual university," with students all over the world and abreast of high technology. I think you can still see evidence of that on parts of the university’s Web site http://www.educ.wsu.edu/handbook/vpds.html.

Lane Rawlins has made the first priority to reestablish the quality core here in Pullman. He’s still interested in outreach, but it’s not as high a priority as it was with Sam.

Lane is pretty much hands-on, although he’s also having to do so much travel that he’s not as involved as he’d like to be. He really enjoys things like working with budgets.

The regents love the fact that the president is directly involved in the budgeting process.

Lane is also very much interested in team building, working closely with a group of vice presidents and deans and others. It’s part of an effort to make sure that everyone is going the same direction, so it’s related to strategic planning.

In some ways, it’s hard to compare these presidencies because you had so many different circumstances. The 60s and 70s were so tumultuous with the Vietnam War, the civil rights movement and other issues. The challenges to the president were quite extraordinary. At any moment, you never knew if someone was planning to take over your office or bomb the buildings.

Since coming back in the 90s, I think the faculty feel more overworked than they did before. When I first returned, the morale was not very good, but I think it’s improved. Generally, I think the faculty like the direction Lane is going.

Today, the university is much more spread out. The branch campuses have really taken hold. Ten years ago, they were really just getting going. Now, they are taking hold, changing the character of the university.

Q: Your position has provided you with a broad view of the entire university. What suggestions do you have for WSU for the next 2-5 years?
Hopkins: I think the directions that are coming out of the strategic planning process are very important to the university. I would urge most administrative decisions, whether they are large or small, to be clearly connected to the strategic plan. It will change some over several years, but it won’t change dramatically.

I hope that the open approach to governance, the strong relationship between the faculty senate and the administration, will continue.

I also hope the benefits of the integrated marketing strategy will start to be realized and capitalized on in ways that will multiply its impact.

The first goal of the strategic plan is to provide the best undergraduate experience in a research university. Certainly in Pullman that includes the extracurricular life of students.

A lot of positive things have happened in the last several years to offset some of the negativity that arose from the riot a few years ago. Student leaders seem to be very enthusiastic about this direction, and the Student Recreation Center will help in that effort as well.

Success in research is a trend that has continued to move strongly upward in the past three years, and that has to continue for us to attain the stature we feel we deserve.

And if the football team can continue to win 10 or 11 games per year, that would be great too. I’m sure the new provost will be able to make sure that happens.

Q: What accomplishment(s) during the past year have pleased you the most?
Hopkins: Overall, progress is pretty incremental.

There’s no doubt in my mind that the most important accomplishment academically during the last year was the stabilizing of the budget and fixing a lot of problems to provide some permanent (funding) solutions. I’m very proud of participating in that process; we got a lot straightened out. But frankly, most of our success was due to the fact that Lane (Rawlins) not only is very interested in the budget but is also a very creative budget maker.

It made the planning and budget process more credible as people saw that it would work.

We also had a couple great appointments, with Warwick Bayly being named the permanent dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine, and Virginia Steel selected as the director of libraries.

By the nature of my appointment here, I saw my role as one of providing stability and day-to-day oversight of things, rather than working to accomplish major projects. I am pleased to say I played a role in both the Integrated Marketing and Strategic Planning Oversight Committee (SPOC), but not a central one. It was more of an ex-officio capacity.

Many of the other things were just routine.

Q: What upcoming issues do you see requiring decisions from Robert Bates?
Hopkins: Having been dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at Virginia Tech so long, it won’t be that big of a change in terms of magnitude. He has had a great deal of experience. But one of his biggest challenges will still be jumping into a role that is universitywide in responsibility. He’ll probably have a pretty steep learning curve for at least the first six months.

Q: Where do faculty need to cut Bates some slack and give him some room? What should they not expect of him for awhile?
Hopkins: It would be best to minimize any expectations on major new directions for a few months, until he can get his feet on the ground and get acquainted. I also would suggest that any special pleading be minimized for awhile. He won’t know how to respond to a request from someone in veterinary medicine until he knows how to balance it against the demands of engineering, liberal arts or general studies. So, if he gets confronted with too many ad hoc requests, all he can say is no.

Just getting acquainted with the major programs and people will be a challenge. That’s one of the advantages I had having been here before. I knew a significant number of the major players.

Also, George Hedge, the vice provost of research, is planning to retire in July, so he (Bates) will need to look at research and planning goals.

I tried to leave the (provost’s) budget in good shape — even though we are headed into some tough times — and didn’t spend the reserves.

Q: If the president told you Bob Bates couldn’t come for another year and he wanted you to stay on, what one thing would you like to accomplish?
Hopkins: I can think of four or five things, but not one.

I’d like to get some research initiatives off the ground, like the Biotechnology Center.

I like to complete the review and assessment of the branch campus initiative structure, which is beginning next month.

I’d certainly like to do something about improving faculty recruitment and retention, particularly in area of faculty of color.

Q: What is a realistic goal in that regard?
Hopkins: WSU currently has twice the number of minority students that it did a decade ago. And the progress has been pretty steady. Some would argue that we’re not where we need to be. Others would argue that we’re making pretty good progress. But it’s hard to argue that we’re not making progress. I’d like to be able to say the same thing for faculty side of the equation, that we were really making progress.

Q: Any thoughts on retiring again?
Hopkins: This is a great institution and I’m leaving with mixed feelings. I don’t have any uncertainty about retiring. I enjoyed being back and I’m delighted to be done. But in some ways it’s harder to retire the second time than it was the first. I feel more of an attachment to WSU than I do to San Diego State (University). That’s not to say that San Diego was not a good experience, it was, but I don’t feel the same bond that I do to WSU. I feel like I’ve made more of a difference here. WSU has always been very good to me and made me feel like I was contributing something important.