This is the question at the heart of many Liberians about Dr. Layli Marpayan’s appointment as president of the University of Liberia (UL). Her selection has sparked a lively debate, with some viewing it as a slap in the face to Liberian scholars and others lauding it as a desperate measure. Regardless of one’s stance, the undeniable reality is that our state-run university has been failing its students for far too long. The very fact that an outsider is being called upon to lead is a testament to the depth of the crisis we face.
I begin this op-ed by commending the selection committee for their bold decision to look beyond the familiar names and for recognizing that extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. I also extend my gratitude to President Joseph Nyuma Boakia for nominating Dr. Marpayan to helm the University of Liberia at such a critical juncture in its history. It is important to state that my optimism, and that of many others, comes squarely from Dr. Marpayan’s impressive professional trajectory —one that arguably surpasses those of her predecessors.
As a Liberian, I understand the concerns that some may have about an outsider leading our national university. Will she truly grasp the unique challenges we face? Can she navigate our complex cultural and political landscape? These are valid questions. However, I believe that Dr. Marpayan’s exceptional qualifications, extensive experience, and proven track record in higher education leadership far outweigh any potential drawbacks. In fact, her outside perspective may be exactly what we need to break free from the cycle of underachievement that has plagued UL for generations.
This cycle of underachievement is painfully visible. The University of Liberia has faced the same problems for decades. The curriculum is stuck in the past, classrooms are bare-bones, and our graduates often find themselves playing catch-up when they venture abroad for further studies. Many UL graduates have to take remedial courses (preparatory classes) in English and math, among others, in developed countries like the Netherlands before they can even begin their programs. This isn’t a reflection of their ability or intelligence. It’s a sign that the university isn’t preparing them well enough for the world beyond Liberia.
Dr. Marpayan’s extensive experience in international higher education and her demonstrated leadership at top educational institutions in the United States could drive much-needed reforms in curriculum, faculty development, and resource mobilization, equipping our students with the tools to compete globally. Thankfully, one of her grants even focused specifically on “Faculty Writing Across the Curriculum,” which clearly speaks to her expertise in these areas.
However, concerns about student activism, especially the Student Unification Party (SUP), are being perceived as a roadblock. Some view SUP as an obstacle to progress, a group of troublemakers rather than serious students. But let’s not mistake the symptom for the disease. The students who protest are not inherently predisposed to unrest; their actions are a direct response to the dire conditions they face daily and academic freedom: crumbling infrastructure, outdated curricula, and a general lack of what a university should provide. However, let me also state for the record that I am not dismissing concerns about occasional disruptive actions at all. I know students can be excessive sometimes in protesting.
Instead of shutting them down, Dr. Marpayan needs to work with these students. She needs to listen and find ways to fix the real problems. Better classrooms, reliable internet, and well-trained teachers would go a long way in addressing their frustrations. If we do that, student activism can become less about complaining and more about finding solutions together. Hopefully, she can do just that!
While the concerns about her background are understandable, they are ultimately misguided. By misguided, I mean these concerns must be weighed against the disappointing track record of previous leaders who were both Liberian and Black. The worry about a non-Liberian leading our state-run university and fears of disconnection from our context must be put into perspective. We have to face the facts: many Liberian leaders before her, despite sharing our nationality, haven’t been able to make the
Dukuly_2
changes we need. Their understanding of our culture, while valuable, hasn’t translated into real improvements for the university.
Clearly, continuing down the same path will not yield different results. This is where Dr. Layli Marpayan’s being an ‘’outsider’ is actually a good thing. She’s not tied down by old relationships or the usual way of doing things in Liberia. This means she can tackle the University’s big problems – like corruption and mismanagement – without having to worry about upsetting the wrong people. She can focus on making changes that will actually help the University, not changes that will keep certain people happy. Because she’s new, she can bring in fresh ideas and put a system in place where people get jobs and resources based on what they can do, not who they know. This could be a major opportunity for needed improvements that haven’t been possible before, for far too long. We need this. We need someone who can finally break the cycle of doing the same thing, and getting nowhere.
And having someone who can bring in resources is exactly what the University needs right now. This is another area where Dr. Marpayan’s strengths can make a difference. One of Dr. Marpayan’s greatest strengths, as evident from her 41-page CV, is her ability to mobilize resources. She has successfully secured grants totaling over $1.3 million—an expertise her predecessors lacked. During the leadership of Dr. Emmet Dennis and Dr. Julius Sarwolo Nelson, persistent issues like leaky roofs forced students to take classes in the rain. Students who dared to voice their frustrations, such as those in the Student Unification Party (SUP), were labeled troublemakers and subjected to arrests and beatings. These failures make it clear: cultural familiarity alone is not enough to deliver the progress UL desperately needs. Money matters, plain and simple—and here, Dr. Marpayan has a clear advantage.
In addition to her fundraising prowess, another very competitive edge that Dr. Marpayan has is that she is a research whiz. She comes with a vast background in research and publication. Her expertise in these areas could be a game-changer for UL’s scholarly output, putting us on the map in a whole new way. She could help develop a culture of research and provide the necessary resources and mentorship to empower our faculty to contribute meaningfully to the global body of knowledge, a crucial step in elevating the University’s standing. This would not only elevate UL’s standing but also give Liberia a stronger voice in international academic conversations.
However, we must also face the truth that transforming UL will not happen overnight, and Dr. Marpayan cannot do it alone. Faculty, students, alumni, and the government all have to play a role. Faculty members need to embrace new teaching methods and be open to improving their skills. Students should keep pushing for progress but also work with the administration to create a shared vision for the University’s future. The Government and diaspora must invest in UL, both financially and by sharing expertise.
Beyond all her impressive academic growth, she also has a qualifying tie with the University of Liberia. She served as a member on the board of the University Consortium for Liberia. This appears to have already borne fruit. One only needs to look at the journey of Jerome Barnard, former ULSU president, a bright Liberian currently pursuing his second master’s degree in the United States, thanks in part to the Consortium’s support. Her leadership could expand this success, linking UL to global institutions like Wellesley College and creating more pathways for students and faculty to thrive.
Ultimately, this is not about discarding our national identity or undervaluing Liberian talent. It is about recognizing that at this critical juncture, the University of Liberia needs a leader with a specific set of skills and experiences that Dr. Marpayan demonstrably possesses. Let us not allow fear of the “other” to blind us to the potential for progress. Let us, instead, embrace this opportunity to build bridges between UL and the global academic community, to learn from best practices worldwide, and to equip our students with the tools they need to thrive, not just in Liberia, but anywhere in the world.
In conclusion, let us hold Dr. Marpayan accountable, not to an abstract notion of who is the right kind of leader but to deliver on tangible improvements: modernizing our curriculum, securing resources, and fostering a vibrant research environment. The future of the University of Liberia, and indeed, the future of our nation, depends on it. Dr. Marpayan has expressed a deep commitment to working collaboratively with Liberian faculty, students, and the wider community. This collaborative spirit, combined with her international expertise, offers a powerful formula for success.
Discussion about this post