The latest issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education includes a survey($) of the nation’s highest paid college presidents, a list topped by Shirley Ann Jackson, who was paid $1,598,247 to lead Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute last year. Jackson also sits on six corporate boards that pay her another $1.3 million per annum. The article is accompanied by an text box listing Jackson’s “Key Accomplishments at Rensselaer.” They are:

• $690-million in new building and renovations to date. Highlights include the Center for Biotechnology and Interdisciplinary Studies, the Computational Center for Nanotechnology Innovations, the Experimental Media and Performing Arts Center, and the East Campus Athletic Village.
• Completed $1.4-billion fund-raising campaign, including a $360-million unrestricted gift in 2001.
• More than 230 new faculty hires since 2000, including a net of 74 new positions.
• Improved academic profile of students, with average SAT scores up 59 points over a decade ago while applications have increased 114 percent.
• Increase in annual sponsored research from $37-million in 1999 to $73-million in 2008.

One can learn a great deal about American higher by considering what is on this list, and what is not. Specifically, there is no mention of how well students at RPI were taught, how much they learned, whether they graduated, and what became of them after they left.  As is common practice, the academic prowess of RPI students is measured ex ante, based on a test administered during the junior year of high school, well before students even applied.

Instead, Jackson’s accomplishments are measured purely in dollars raised, buildings constructed, and faculty hired. Students are mentioned only in terms of generated demand, not education applied.

There’s much discussion in the halls of Congress and public policy circles these days about higher education accountability. I’ll be speaking at an conference on the topic in a few weeks (sign up here). But the real accountability system–the measures that matter, the forces that influence and bind–doesn’t live inside of any laws or regulations or systems of governance. It’s right there–and only there–on the list. That’s what higher education leaders are paid top dollar to achieve. That’s how you end up with your picture in the Chronicle of Higher Education. It’s hard to fault Shirley Ann Jackson or anyone else for acting rationally within that system. And perhaps she and her faculty have done a fantastic job of teaching the students in their charge. But if they have, it wasn’t considered a “key accomplishment.” And until that changes, colleges and universities won’t work as hard or as well on behalf of their students as they should.