Northwestern’s South Beach is dotted with kayaks nestled next to the sailing center. On a clear gameday this September, small boats clustered on the water to watch the football team play in the temporary lakeside stadium. And on the south end of campus, a cruise ship towers over Lake Michigan.
Except, it’s not a cruise ship. It’s the Patrick G. and Shirley W. Ryan Center for the Musical Arts, which houses the Bienen School of Music and offices for the School of Communication. Its ship-like structure led to the building’s nickname: the S.S. Bienen.
The Center was constructed in 2015, six years after Henry S. Bienen left the helm as Northwestern president. Now, following the resignation of former-President Michael Schill, Bienen has returned to steer the ship.
Schill announced his resignation on Sept. 4, less than two weeks before the 2025-26 academic year began. The New York Times reported the move was in response to Republican scrutiny and federal cuts of $790 million. He held the position for only three years, nearly half the average term of a university president, according to a 2023 report from the American Council on Education (ACE).
Historically, interim presidents were appointed to “hold the rudder steady” until the board could select a permanent replacement, according to a Northwestern Libraries web exhibit on its presidential history. But Schill’s departure leaves Northwestern at a tense moment, with key decision-makers poised to shape the future of the institution.
The presidential role
Being a university president has always come with its share of difficulties. Some former interim presidents of Northwestern took over after their predecessors died in office; others served amidst World War II-era demands for active support in the war effort or student activism in the 1960s and 1970s.
But the job has become more and more contentious in light of attacks on higher education from President Donald Trump’s administration. Across the country, institutional leaders have had to respond to funding cuts, White House criticisms and other interferences from the federal government.
A Northwestern president’s main role is to report directly to the Northwestern Board of Trustees and ensure its actions are carried out, according to University Statutes published in 2024. They work with the board, provost, vice presidents of the University and faculty members to protect the institution’s “interest and welfare.”
The job entails many roles, says Patricia McGuire. She would know; she has been president of Trinity Washington University (TWU) in Washington, D.C., for nearly 40 years. Yet she has never seen this kind of pressure from the federal government on higher education, particularly a select group of elite institutions.
“By extension, we all feel tormented, even if we’re not in the line of fire,” McGuire says. “The way in which this administration is going after certain institutions is a disgrace. The question for your new president will be: Can they hold fast to the values and vision and mission for Northwestern or will they be pressured into making change for political expediency?”
Some university leaders have buckled under pressure from the Trump administration. The University of Virginia’s (UVA) president James E. Ryan resigned in June amidst conflict over diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. Northwestern is one of at least seven universities to announce sudden presidential departures in September, according to Higher Ed Dive. Others include, most notably, Texas A&M University and Westminster University in Utah, both of whose leaders were involved in recent political turmoil.
Other universities have held firm. On Oct. 10, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) was the first university to reject the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” a proposal from the Trump administration outlining their vision for the country’s university system.
The compact demands schools limit international student enrollment, freeze tuition for five years, maintain strict definitions of gender and prohibit anything that “belittles” conservative ideas, according to The New York Times. For any school that agreed to the compact, the administration promised priority access to federal funding and fewer restraints on overhead costs.
The proposal, along with a letter outlining the benefits, was sent to nine top universities on Oct. 1, although Trump later indicated the compact was open to any college. The schools had until Oct. 20 to respond.
Of the nine universities initially presented with the compact, seven rejected it (MIT, Brown University, University of Pennsylvania (Penn), University of Southern California, Dartmouth College, University of Arizona and UVA). Vanderbilt University provided feedback to the Trump administration, and the University of Texas at Austin has not made a public statement.
Since Trump opened his offer to other colleges, four have rejected the proposal (Washington University in St. Louis, Emory University and Syracuse University). Arizona State University has also sent feedback. The administration plans to update the document and publish a new version in November, according to Inside Higher Ed.
Decisions like these are not made by a university president, or interim president, alone. If Bienen were to consider a deal with the Trump administration, the Board of Trustees, faculty and students should all have a say under a commonly accepted concept in higher education called “shared governance.”
In 1966, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) wrote a statement on shared governance, which described what Matt Hartley, a professor of education at Penn, calls the “inescapable interdependence” between the constituents of an institution. His research focuses on academic governance, or how colleges are run, including how different universities develop strategic directions and execute shared governance.
Private universities like Northwestern and Penn are legally charitable organizations, Hartley explains. The Board of Trustees is the most important body, overseeing the institution’s well-being and adherence to its mission. The Board appoints the president as its direct actor on campus, who is expected to work with constituents to advance the institution’s mission. The president also collaborates with the faculty — or professors — to ensure the academic quality of the institution. Each university has the responsibility to include all involved parties, including students, in decision-making, he says.
Presidential transitions are critical to an institution, Hartley says. The shift to a new president can be a catalyst for conversations about the university’s mission, but the interim period is a time when planning is largely suspended. It can be a time of excitement, he says, but in this political environment, it is also a time of uncertainty.
Melissa A. Simon, a professor at Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine, calls the situation with Bienen abnormal. He assumed the role of interim president “in the face of crisis and turmoil,” she says.
“That makes this [transition] a little more complicated,” Simon says. “But the president of a university is responsible for guiding the ship.”
A transition of turmoil
In a time of changeover, Hartley says, it can be valuable for a university to select an interim president who understands the institution. Appointing someone like Bienen, who has experience with Northwestern, might have been an easy decision for the board. Most of nterim presidents were professors at the University, although several served in the interim position twice.
“He’s someone who can make difficult decisions because he’s not trying to get the job,” Hartley says. “If there are really difficult issues that need to be addressed, he knows the institution. He clearly cares about the institution, but he’s not angling for [the job] for the long haul.”
Hartley also believes that because Bienen is likely no longer focused on long-term career outcomes, he might be more resistant to external pressure, like that of the federal government.
In January 2023, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis appointed new trustees to the board of the New College of Florida as part of a move toward a conservative-influenced education agenda. Then-President Patricia Okker said she would not align with the shift, and was subsequently fired. The school, which was previously a progressive college in the red state, became the first institution to indicate it would sign Trump’s compact for higher education on Oct. 27, according to The New York Times.
Some students have speculated about the possibility of such a shift occurring at Northwestern, and are concerned about the institutional position the University president will take. The universities targeted by the Trump administration have taken different actions based on their stance on academia.
One such approach is that of “institutional neutrality,” a policy where a university refrains from taking public stances on controversial issues outside its core mission. In January 2025, the AAUP adopted a statement on institutional neutrality, which reaffirms that it is “neither a necessary condition for academic freedom nor categorically incompatible with it.”
On Aug. 9, 2024, the President’s Advisory Committee on Free Expression and Institutional Speech presented a statement to Schill saying they “do not endorse a simplistic version of ‘university neutrality.’” Instead, they advised committing to the areas where the University and its members should not be neutral: fostering open dialogue and pursuing knowledge and truth. The statement emphasized that members of the Northwestern community can speak freely on controversial topics, but not on behalf of the University. The committee, formed by Schill in February 2024, was primarily made up of faculty, as well as then-president emeritus Bienen.
On Oct. 15, the Faculty Assembly met to discuss, among other issues, the University’s response to the federal government. At the meeting, Bienen said he wants to “do a deal with the federal government,” according to The Daily Northwestern. He said he won’t cross any “red lines” that hinder the University’s autonomy, including what the University teaches, who it hires and the students it admits.
Faculty members questioned Bienen about how Northwestern would respond if a professor was targeted for their teaching. They also brought up the possibility of a coordinated effort between institutions of higher education against the actions of the federal government. Professor of History Leslie Harris urged Bienen to take a stand against the federal government, particularly in the wake of Harvard’s success, and the assembly voted to oppose Northwestern signing Trump’s compact.
This isn’t the first time concerned professors have spoken up in recent months. Paul Gowder, a professor at Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, signed an op-ed published in The Daily in July that opposed Northwestern striking a deal with the Trump administration. Still, he understands the presence of “tactical disagreements” on how to respond to the federal government’s actions.
“I disagree with [what President Bienen said], but it’s not crazy,” Gowder says. “It is entirely reasonable to think, ‘OK, do we want to get into this kind of knockdown, dragged out fight that Harvard’s in?’”
Gowder dislikes the idea of “institutional neutrality” because it opens a debate over what that means in practice. However, he was heartened by the fact that Northwestern has not signed a deal with the Trump administration.
“I do think that President Bienen’s heart is in the right place,” Gowder says. “He’s invested in what’s best for the University, even as I think I would personally prefer a much stronger tactical position than he seems to be willing to take.”
That stronger tactical position resonates with the AAUP statement on institutional neutrality, which concludes that defending academic freedom has never been neutral. Bard College President Leon Botstein agrees with this sentiment. He says the question of institutional neutrality is the wrong one.
“First of all, there is no such thing as neutrality, so forget about it,” Botstein says. “Second of all, the university has a mission, and that mission is about education, research and the search for truth. It’s about the pursuit of knowledge, the distinction between truth and fiction, especially in the context of AI. It stands for a bunch of stuff. That’s its mission. And the truth is rarely neutral.”
Simon is disappointed that Northwestern is not standing with other peer institutions against the federal government. At the Oct. 15 meeting, Bienen said there had not been an active effort to form a unified front with other university leaders, she says.
“I don’t know the playbook, and I am not privy to this, but what I’m very saddened by and disheartened by is three things,” Simon says. “The lack of adherence or respect for faculty governance, the lack of wanting to sue the federal administration, given examples of how it’s worked for both California schools and Harvard, and the fact that our interim president wants to make a ‘deal.’”
Following the meeting, votes were tallied and the resolution opposing the Trump compact passed. Despite the resolution’s success, Simon is concerned about Bienen’s statements. She emphasizes that Bienen can’t claim ignorance on the basis of being new to Northwestern.
“When President Bienen says, ‘Oh well, I wasn’t here. President Schill was the one who told Congress that there was going to be anti-bias training done by students,’ it’s not OK to shift the blame,” Simon says. “I do not think that because he’s interim [president], he can use that word ‘interim’ … to not have to answer some of these hard questions.”
Naomi Wu, assistant director of presidential communications in the office of the president, declined to comment on this story. Abigail Griffin, administrative assistant in the office of the president, declined to comment on this story. Dianna Shaleen Klein, assistant to the president, declined to comment on this story. Other members of the Office of the President did not respond for comment.
Presidential future
A university president is many things: a figurehead of the institution, a mouthpiece to the country, a spokesperson to the board and donors. In many ways, the next Northwestern president can determine the direction of the University.
Institutions are facing a difficult moment and navigating it how they see fit, Hartley says. Harvard sued the federal government in April after they froze over $2.2 billion in federal funding. Less than 24 hours before breaking the news of Schill’s resignation, the The New York Times reported that a judge ruled the government violated the law by freezing Harvard’s funds. As of Oct. 14, The Harvard Crimson reported that a majority of the funding had been restored.
Northwestern has had no such luck since $790 million of its own federal funding was frozen in April. Landmark decisions like the one at Harvard are part of why faculty members like Simon are encouraging Bienen and Northwestern to take a strong stance against the federal government.
But not all institutions have been successful in their pushback. On Oct. 22, UVA’s interim president signed a deal with the Trump administration, despite community support for former-President Ryan.
“Institutions are trying to figure out what’s a reasonable way forward,” Hartley says. “I think at a certain point, if push comes to shove, institutional neutrality may simply just be impossible to adhere to.”
An NBN poll found that students have mixed feelings about Bienen returning as interim president. A majority of responses indicated ‘visibility on campus’ was important for the next Northwestern president.
As ASG co-president, Weinberg third-year Jamal Omoniyi meets with the president on a regular basis and other members of the Northwestern administration to discuss issues that impact students. With the leadership transition, he says there has been a debate over whether the president’s primary focus is internal Northwestern affairs or external issues like the federal government.
“The goal would be to have a more student-centered president rather than trustee-centered,” Omoniyi says. “The role of the president of the University should be focused on faculty and students.”
He believes the president should interact with students more often than the twice-quarterly meetings the ASG co-presidents had with Schill previously. He wants an increased focus on students and their Northwestern experience.
Another anonymous response to the NBN poll indicated that students think the Board “would only pick someone willing to submit to Trump’s demands.” McGuire’s approach as a university president is the opposite. Since Trump’s first term, she has been outspoken about him and his policies.
“I believe that presidents must be able to speak out on behalf of the values that our institutions hold dear,” McGuire says. “Some people say that’s political. I say it’s not political, it’s moral. I do not believe in institutional neutrality or in presidential silence. We have to speak about what’s important, and I would hope that Northwestern’s president could speak about what’s important for Northwestern.”
McGuire calls the current attacks on academic freedom “anti-American.” Additionally, she says universities — the board of trustees, president and everyone at the institution — must be united in support of that freedom.
“Higher education is in the fight of its life right now,” McGuire says, “and the fight is being carried on against the most elite, wealthy institutions in the country.”
As the trustees consider who to appoint as Schill’s full-time replacement, McGuire hopes they do not succumb to pressure to choose a president who will bow to administration demands.
Botstein believes boards often select the wrong kind of person to the office of university president. He says the best-suited candidates are those who do not actively seek out the role.
“They shouldn’t choose people who do not stand for anything about the university. They shouldn’t choose someone who is not willing to fight for the core values of higher education, whether at Northwestern, my institution, Bard or at a state university,” Botstein says. “At the current moment, they need to find someone who can propel Northwestern into a leadership position on the vital issues that face all colleges and universities.”
Those issues? Autonomy, academic freedom, academic excellence, the defense of democracy and the “preservation of America’s preeminence as a place … with protection from the weaponizing of government, without putting a boot on the neck of the university,” he says.
In the midst of that fight, Botstein emphasizes the importance of a president who is accessible to constituents. He calls it a vocation, not a job. He has never taken a vacation in his 50 years as president and does not want to.
The Wednesday-morning interview with Botstein was supposed to last 20 minutes. He stayed on the Zoom call for nearly an hour.
The same is true for McGuire. At the end of the call, McGuire said she was willingly in her office on a holiday weekend because she had work to do.
“Everybody likes to paint these jobs as terrible,” McGuire says. “Being a college president is one of the best jobs in the world. You need somebody who also can see the joy and can feel the joy and has love for the students. The other stuff will go into proportion if you can see what the good parts are.”
Part of that love is building an institution where students can flourish. She says the next president of Northwestern will play an essential role in the school’s future.
“I hope every single Northwestern trustee reads this and hears me say it,” McGuire says. “It is vitally important for the boards of our institutions to be cohesive, and to support the president, and to support the values and mission of the institution, and not to sell out to political points of view. Higher education is independent of government.”
Print design by Neha Parameswaran.