Financial aid was on Provost Martin’s mind last night in Kennedy Hall. Martin’s second annual State of the University Address may not have focused exclusively on dollars and cents, but her nearly half-hour long meditation on the subject of college rankings was surely inspired by the Ivy League’s recent game of aid one-upmanship.

We’re glad Martin decided to bring up the illogic of this country’s obsession with college rankings. Especially over the last few weeks, it’s become clear that Cornell has no business trying to keep up with the Harvards. Instead, this University would be better served by a healthy regard for the characteristics that make it unique.

The reasons for Cornell to quit its game of institutional catch-up go beyond the financial. As Martin said, those who can afford a college education have a responsibility to pay what they can. Universities are in the business of fostering social mobility, not subsidizing the upper middle-class.

While we are heartened that Martin recognizes the futility of investing Cornell in the rankings game, we are left wondering why that game took such a prominent place in her speech. The state of the University, it seems, is of an institution struggling to define its role in academia and the world. Instead of focusing her address on the University’s vision for progress and development, Martin seemed to suggest that the University’s priority is simply introspection.

All this is not to say that Martin’s speech was devoid of any specific prescriptions of University policy. As she did last year, the Provost reiterated the importance of diversity within this University, and affirmed her continued commitment to the hiring of new University faculty. But when you devote so much of your mission statement to the need for institutional definition, it makes us wonder how confident this University is in that definition in the first place.

Cornell has been through a difficult couple of months. The University took some serious heat for a relatively weak financial aid policy, and most of that criticism focused on the policies of other schools within the Ivy League. Cornell, though, should never have been comparing itself to those other Ivies, nor should it ever feel compelled to establish University policy based on the behavior of some of its “peer” institutions.

No doubt, Martin was trying to get that message across in her speech last night. After months of criticism, the University had a lot to get off its chest. The message was indeed a good one, but it was also inappropriate for an address on the state of this University. In focusing on the “manipulative” nature of the rankings system, Martin seemed to be apologizing for Cornell’s membership in a league of its own. More than most people, the Provost must know that no apology is necessary.