In planning for the future, it is often useful to look back to our roots to see how today's plans fulfill the original purposes. The story of Russell Conwell and the founding is well known and is revered at Temple.

In 1887, Charles Davies, a deacon of Reverend Conwell's Baptist Temple, approached Conwell for advice about how to prepare for the ministry. He could not afford to attend school, Davies said, because it was necessary for him to work to support his mother and brothers. Conwell offered to tutor Davies, and it was agreed that they would meet. On the occasion of their first meeting, Charles Davies appeared with six friends, all in similar economic circumstances, who also desired to obtain an education. Conwell welcomed these additional parishioners to study.

In the next year—on May 14, 1888—the state issued a charter for Temple College for "the support of an educational institution intended primarily to benefit workingmen." Three years later the Charter was amended to add the phrase: "and for young men and women desirous of attending the same." In 1895, the Law School opened; in the following year, the School of Music; and in 1901, the Department of Medicine, the first coeducational medical school in the Commonwealth. Other colleges were quickly added, and by 1922 there were 12 schools and colleges, enrolling 8,000 students; and Temple University, as the institution had been designated in 1907, was offering graduate education as well as professional and undergraduate studies.

On July 1, 1965, Temple became a State-related university. Since that time, the partnership between the Commonwealth and Temple has created a broad range of educational opportunities, research benefits and direct community services that have enhanced the lives of Pennsylvania's citizens. Temple looks forward to the continued good health of this partnership.

These brief observations are pertinent today. Although enrollment now is generally lower than it has been over the previous two decades, there has been some increase in the number of students during the past three years. At some meetings of Temple people, the question has been raised about how large Temple should become. It is clear that Temple has room to grow from today's 29,500 students to the largest size it has been in recent times, about 33,000 students. That does not answer the question whether Temple should grow. Here we may find a lesson in the story of the founding: Reverend Conwell agreed to tutor Charles Davies, but he did not turn away six others who sought also to obtain instruction. There is another aspect of this story that also guides us: Conwell wanted to instruct those who were highly motivated and were prepared to learn.

Temple's early years bear on today in a further way: In the fall of 2000, the Pennsylvania Economy League - Eastern Division issued a report entitled Greater Philadelphia's Knowledge Industry: Leveraging the Region's Colleges and Universities in the New Economy. The PEL concluded that Philadelphia's 83 colleges and universities must play a major role if metropolitan Philadelphia is to develop a regional economy fully competitive with other major metropolitan areas. The steps recommended by the PEL seem particularly pertinent to Temple's longstanding mission and to Temple's capabilities at this time. Specifically, the PEL recommended that Philadelphia's institutions of higher education:

• Increase enrollments by at least 20,000 full-time equivalent students;

• Increase the retention of college and university graduates in the Philadelphia region;

• Focus additional efforts on educational programs related to three "industry clusters" underlying the emerging economy in the region: (1) hospitality and tourism; (2) professional services, especially those relating to business skills; and (3) life sciences;

• Expand programs, especially at the graduate level, relating to biotechnology, business, computer sciences and computer-related engineering, pharmaceuticals, and tourism and hospitality, including the arts and culture;

• Increase significantly the total volume of university research, especially sponsored research, with an emphasis on life sciences, pharmaceutical-related studies, computer applications (including information systems and e-commerce), and medical sciences;

• Expand efforts to discover the applications of research that can lead to business spin-offs; and

• Expand the role of colleges and universities in "anchoring communities" by developing residential life around campuses, improving safety, generating jobs, improving pre-college education, and providing cultural and educational amenities in the neighborhoods.

The PEL was, of course, looking especially at the role of colleges and universities in economic development, and that is not the only role that our institutions play. But many of the PEL's prescriptions are consistent with Temple's longstanding commitment to offering educational opportunities for those who are from Philadelphia or will remain here, providing curricula that allow students to prepare for economic endeavors, advancing the arts and culture, conducting research as a national center for inquiry, and collaborating with our neighbors to improve the community in which we are located.

There is more continuity in Temple's aspirations and the community's expectations of Temple over these nearly 115 years than there are differences.

With these very preliminary observations about the continuity of the University's historical purposes in our present circumstances, let me discuss in a more systematic way a number of the most significant challenges facing Temple.

Disclaimers are in order at the outset. To say that Temple faces significant challenges is not to say that Temple is in distress. Indeed, under former President Liacouras, Temple has grown as a vibrant institution educationally and a sound one financially. And to suggest important directions for change does not imply that either the institution or its people have been misdirected. It is an art form to point new directions without implicitly conveying an impression—at least to some—that the labors of the recent past are unappreciated or were wrongly directed. I am not confident that I will be sufficiently artful to entirely avoid these impressions, but I want to give an assurance at the outset that Temple's strengths and vitality are very much in evidence and create a solid foundation for future endeavors.