Please consider downloading the latest version of Internet Explorer
to experience this site as intended.
Skip to content

Features

Where Curiosity Is ‘Just Part of Life’Universities are vital institutions. That’s why accessibility is so important, says Sarah Mangelsdorf. Interview by Karen McCally ’02 (PhD)

You’ve spoken movingly about the richness of university life as you first experienced it growing up as the daughter of a Swarthmore College physics professor. What captivated you from the very beginning, and how has that background shaped your approach to academic leadership?

If you grow up in an academic family, you take for granted that it’s fine to ask questions. We could ask questions about nature, about history, about grammar—just about anything. It was just part of life. My mom, who was with us more of the time, because Dad was often in the lab, would say, if she didn’t know the answer, “Why don’t you look it up?” So, we grew up as little researchers. And I didn’t really realize what a gift that was at the time.

A lot of academics lived in our community, so in addition to knowing scientists like my father we also knew historians, art historians, economists, sociologists, poets, and dancers. There were also these great cultural things going on all the time on the Swarthmore College campus and we could go to free concerts, lectures, films, and other events. I took modern dance from a student at Swarthmore and all the students in her class took master classes with all the visiting dance troupes who came to campus. I remember taking a master class with the Merce Cunningham Dance Company, and not realizing until later what a big deal that was.

It was completely normal to be intellectually curious about all kinds of topics, and I think in a way that prepared me very well to be an academic administrator. I love my academic work as a psychologist, but in the academy, we tend to go deep in specific areas of study. But then when I became a dean, I found myself introducing and listening to lectures given by art historians, or reading tenure papers about black holes, or Irish poetry, and I thought, “This is great, I’m back in my element!” The intellectual curiosity my family encouraged about lots of different topics is what makes me very interested in all the things that go on at a university. And it’s also made me respect all the different ways that one can be a scholar.

What has your role as a developmental psychologist brought to your leadership?

When I’m introduced, and people say, “she has a PhD in child psychology,” sometimes people look a little puzzled. “What would someone with a PhD in child psychology know about running a major research university?”—that may be crossing through their mind. And I always want to make a joke about how relevant it is!

As a research psychologist, I had started out focused on parent-child relationships, and then eventually moved on to the study of family systems. I noticed when I became an administrator how some of the same organizational principles that apply to family systems apply to other organizations as well, such as academic departments.

I never cease to be a psychologist. I find people fascinating. I love to hear their life stories, how they went from point A to point B, how they followed this passion or that. One of the things that really surprised me when I became a dean was how much I loved alumni relations and fundraising. Initially I had the feeling that asking people for money would make me uncomfortable. But meeting all of these very successful people who attributed their success, at least in part, to what your university has done for them, the education they received—and then finding out about their life stories, is just fascinating.

There’s been a rising mistrust of higher education in some sectors of the American population. Why do you think that is, and how might institutions respond to it?

It’s true that the most recent surveys by the Pew Research Center, which has studied public perceptions of higher ed, reveal that more of the American public has more concerns and questions about the value of higher education than they did in the past. But it’s still the case that the majority of people—even among those who express some dismay about higher education—when asked if they would want their children to go to college, almost all say yes. So I think there’s a kind of disconnect.

Looking in the rearview mirror, I think one of the things that caused people to lose some trust was that colleges and universities didn’t keep a watch on tuition increases. We just kept raising tuition—legitimately, in that delivering high-quality education is an expensive endeavor, and our costs went up. But as those costs rose, even in public institutions it seemed that tuition was out of reach for the average American, and our financial aid is not always as transparent as it might be. Many people don’t understand the concepts of “sticker price” and “tuition discounting.” There are many, many stories about student debt. It’s one of the major forms of debt in this country, so people are right to be concerned.

But in the public discourse, there’s a lack of understanding about different kinds of academic institutions and the kind of debt load that students accrue at different institutions. For example, students who go to for-profit schools take on more debt and are more likely to foreclose on their loans than students who go to not-for-profit schools. Students who never finish college and have a lot of loans are in a lot of trouble.

At the University of Rochester, fewer than 50 percent of our students in the Class of 2018 graduated owing any federal loans, and among those the average was under $25,000, which is less than what I paid for my Subaru. And my Subaru depreciated as soon as I drove it out of the dealer’s lot, whereas a college education, over time, is worth more in terms of the overall return on the investment. Now, I don’t mean to underplay the challenges that loan debt can present.

But I think of a college education as an appreciating asset, and appreciating assets are often worth the investment. Of course, we must do all we can to keep student debt to a minimum. As an academic administrator one of my priorities has always been raising funds from our alumni and friends so that the cost of a college education is not too burdensome for our students and their families.

We—we, the University of Rochester, or higher education in general—can’t just be here to serve the students from the most affluent families or students from academic families, who aren’t necessarily the wealthiest but in terms of social capital have many, many privileges. If we just served those students, we’d be failing miserably, in my opinion. When I learn stories of alumni who were themselves first-generation students, and for whom getting a college education literally changed their life trajectory, that’s very compelling to me. We also know from having followed the whole cohort of working-class men who were able to go to college after World War II on the GI Bill, that that changed the trajectory of their lives and the lives of their children.

I see recruiting as many low-income and first-generation students as possible as a crucial part of our mission. I think Rochester has been doing a good job of that. When I was at the University of Wisconsin, we were part of something called the American Talent Initiative, which was started by Michael Bloomberg in collaboration with the Aspen Institute, to get top public and private universities in this country to commit to taking more first-generation, low-income students. And Rochester is doing better at that than some of the institutions that are members of the American Talent Initiative.

What do you think the University of Rochester owes to the city and region?

The relationship with the local community is important for all universities, but this university has always been particularly engaged with the community. Not only that, when I was preparing my Inauguration remarks, I learned that the University actually grew out of the community. When the University moved to the River Campus, literally thousands of Rochesterians donated money to make it happen. It wasn’t just George Eastman.

My first week here I met with the mayor. Over the last three months I have also met with other political and community leaders in the area, and I have attended events hosted by a number of our local trustees where I was able to meet leaders from around the community. We’re all trying to think about the best way to work together to make the city and the region the best possible place it can be.

One thing that’s a big concern for me is that I’ve been surprised at how few people I work with at the University actually live in the city. I think that’s a symptom of a problem. To have a vibrant city, people have to want to live in it.

You and your husband [Karl Rosengren, a professor of psychology and of brain and cognitive sciences] have had a few months to settle into life in the Rochester. How has it been so far?

We already knew Rochester was beautiful when we arrived, but we keep being pleasantly surprised. There are so many wonderful places to walk, to run, to cycle, to hike. I’m not going to have much time for any of those, but I do try to get my runs in!

Our first month here, I said, “We should check out Highland Park,” which is just down the street from [Witmer House]. “It’s supposed to be pretty.” And when we got there we thought, “this is gorgeous.” With the variety of the trees—it’s just a magnificent park.

And, of course, I knew about the University’s Eastman School of Music, but I didn’t realize what a vital role it also plays in the community. There are so many events, all the time. During one of my visits here last spring, there was a high school state jazz competition taking place. So, it’s really a hub of cultural activity for the community and for the state.

It’s also been fun to explore the interesting little neighborhoods. They’re all very distinctive, and with such variety in the architecture—in the residential areas, but also the commercial buildings downtown. The Powers Building, the Sibley Building—as someone who likes architecture and history, it’s been a fun place to explore.

And I love going to the Public Market. I like the whole mix of people who come there. It’s incredibly diverse. People are speaking multiple languages. In the summer, I was able to get my fresh flowers there every Saturday. And I love the coffee roasters, the cheese shop, and the bakery.

How do you balance your heavy schedule of commitments with finding time to think, plan, and make decisions? Or just with continuing to get acclimated to your new home?

Sometimes I just need to go for a run and clear my head. It’s important to build in time to think, because, in fact, you don’t do your best thinking about things when you just run from one thing to the next without time to really process what you just heard in the last meeting.

I try to build time into my schedule for reading, thinking, planning, and working on speeches, but sometimes those times get eaten up by the latest hot-button issue. So, it is an ongoing challenge.

It’s particularly hectic now, because I’m a newcomer. People have been incredibly welcoming. But when you’re a newcomer, every part of your life is new. I’m still learning my way around. I’m so proud of myself if I can get from one place to another around Rochester without using my GPS.

It was completely normal to be intellectually curious about all kinds of topics, and . . . that prepared me very well to be an academic administrator.