Shortly after becoming Kansas University’s 16th chancellor, Robert Hemenway announced one of his primary goals was to have KU ranked among the nation’s top 25 public universities academically.

He said once this goal was achieved, he wanted KU to eventually be ranked in the top 25 of all American universities.

Unfortunately, during his 14 years at KU, the university fell far short of these goals. In fact, KU has slipped, rather than advanced, in the U.S. News and World Report rankings. In the magazine’s most recent report, KU is listed as tied with the University of Nebraska in the 104th position among the nation’s major universities (public and private) and again tied with Nebraska and three other universities in the 47th spot among the nation’s public universities.

Some in the university environment pooh-pooh the U.S. News rankings, but growing numbers of academics realize the importance of how schools are ranked. Parents, faculty members, state legislators and taxpayers want to know how a particular school ranks with other schools. Even chancellors and presidents give significant weight to national rankings, whether in academics or sports. They, too, have egos and like to brag.

These days, there is growing concern about KU’s ranking and where the institution may be ranked in the years to come. Many faculty members, KU alumni and friends and state legislators question the school’s commitment and leadership and whether the university has the vision to climb in national academic rankings.

• • •

A related matter to KU’s ranking is the fact KU and Nebraska are tied in the magazine’s annual grading of universities. This comes shortly after Nebraska officials announced the university would be leaving the Big 12 conference to join the Big 10.

For years, KU has ranked ahead of Nebraska, but NU officials have made a major effort to improve the school’s ranking and it now has tied KU.

In their comments about moving to the Big 10, Nebraska officials (the president and athletic director) made it clear they looked down their noses at the Big 12 schools. They said Nebraska would be much more in step academically and researchwise with Big 10 schools than with Big 12 schools. They thought they were better suited to be in what they considered a far more prestigious Big 10. In the U.S. News rankings, five Big 12 schools ranked higher than the Cornhuskers — Texas, Texas A&M, Colorado, Baylor and Iowa State — and they are tied with KU.

Perhaps Nebraska officials were a bit too quick to play the one-upmanship game with their academic excellence or suggest that they were too good to remain in the Big 12.

• • •

Back to the “ranking” business. What is happening to KU’s School of Business? In last year’s ranking of undergraduate business schools at public universities, the KU program was ranked 28th. This year’s report placed the KU school in the 35th position.

As noted above, some may think rankings don’t matter too much, but the significant fall of the KU School of Business should send shockwaves through KU’s faculty, its students, KU’s senior administration, the Kansas Board of Regents and those parents whose children are considering coming to KU for a business degree.

Several weeks ago, a group of students pursuing master’s of business administration degrees at KU called attention to what they say is total mismanagement of approximately $32 million in course fees collected over the past six years in the differential tuition plan. This is money collected from business students to help make the school’s programs better and more rewarding for its students.

Since the $32 million in fees were collected from the students, students are supposed to be part of a committee that decides how best to spend these dollars. After one year, the dean dropped students from the committee, and now, an impressive group of MBA students is asking embarrassing questions.

Unfortunately, KU officials, as well as members of the Board of Regents, seem to be ignoring the questions raised by the students. This is wrong and does not reflect well on the school’s leadership. The students deserve answers and corrective actions, particularly when differential tuition funds account for 40 percent of the school’s operating budget.

• • •

Although the search for a new dean for the KU School of Law continues, there is good news about the school. Earlier this week, preLaw magazine placed the school on its top 20 “best value” list.

To qualify for this honor, law schools must meet four criteria: their bar pass rate is higher than the state average; their average indebtedness is below $100,000; their employment rate nine months after graduation is 85 percent or higher; and tuition is less than $35,000 a year for in-state residents.

• • •

In another KU-related matter, when will a search committee be formed to find a new KU athletic director?

It is hoped those on this committee will be more thorough and deep in their investigation of possible candidates than those on several recent KU search committees for extremely important posts on Mount Oread.

In a recent Saturday Column, this writer noted what he had been told by several university chancellors, athletic directors, athletic conference directors and successful athletes. They cautioned against KU’s current athletic director, Lew Perkins, having any role in the search for his successor. They said it would be a serious mistake to have the AD play a role in selecting those on the search committee or making any suggestions as to who should follow him as athletic director. These comments were made prior to the most recent, ugly and disappointing revelations about actions in the athletic department and Perkins’ travel budget.

It now is understood that Perkins is strongly recommending that one of his current staff members be moved into the AD position. This, according to a number of highly respected and successful individuals in the collegiate athletics field, would be a serious mistake.

Perkins should not be allowed to play a role in this important selection exercise.

• • •

Many are wondering when Perkins will step aside from his high-paying job, perhaps the highest-paid AD position in the nation. Some Perkins supporters claim he wanted to resign much sooner than his announced retirement date of September 2011, but that Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little asked him to stay on the job until she learned more about collegiate athletics and the KU situation.

One thing is fairly clear about KU’s athletic director situation. Past KU ADs, such as Monte Johnson and Bob Frederick, did not do anything or engage in actions that appear to violate sound and ethical procedures. Long-time observers cannot remember any acts of self-enrichment by Johnson or Frederick. They did not have to have an ethics policy or a summary of “dos and don’ts.” They knew what was right and ethical. They did not disband the athletics board and replace it with a smaller handpicked group of individuals who could be managed and directed far easier than a strong athletics board composed of individuals concerned about and committed to a clean operation that would not be an embarrassment to the university.

• • •

Each of the situations mentioned above, plus others, such as the long-overdue start of a capital campaign and the question of who will lead the campaign, point out how badly KU needs strong leadership and vision. The university seems to be reeling in so many areas.

This is taking place even though the university has many truly outstanding and committed faculty members, individuals who are so loyal to the school but also are concerned about the lack of leadership. This concern started to spread during the latter years of the Hemenway chancellorship and appears to be growing under Gray-Little’s tenure. This concern about vision, leadership and courage has been a matter of much discussion on the campus, but now it is spreading throughout a much wider, concerned public.

It’s far past time to see and get action and results by the regents and those in senior positions on Mount Oread.

Unfortunately, the public, students and the entire state are being shortchanged by the actions of many at KU. It is an excellent university with a proud past, but continued complacency by the regents, a lack of leadership on the campus, questionable ethics and an indifferent public that doesn’t demand corrective actions are sure to be the recipe for a mediocre institution that will be bypassed in favor of schools that do enjoy sound leadership and a desire to excel.

Not too many years ago, under the leadership of chancellors such as Franklin Murphy, Clarke Wescoe, Archie Dykes and Gene Budig, KU was looked upon as one of the nation’s up-and-coming state universities. It enjoyed national attention, attracted outstanding faculty members and had graduates who excelled in many areas.

There was excitement and enthusiasm on and off the campus about the achievements of the school and its leaders.

It is imperative KU regains this excellence and position of leadership.