That stuff is pretty badly specified and has pretty random processes, but it seems unlikely. Some speculation:

a) officials doing things in their official role generally have by default "public interest" against them

b) She is still chancellor, making the public interest even argument stronger and weakening her case. This is all still somewhat going on, not some transgression in the past, which these rules mostly are about. And even in the future, a few years after she has left

c) the university doesn't have the personality right, and the information who has been chancellor at a specific time won't be generally removed. So even if she would win a request to remove her name, it would be trivial for sites to still make the connection, making the entire exercise pointless for her, especially since I'd expect it to require a few court cases, triggering Streisand to full effect again.

If some site published private data about her (where she lives, about her family, ...) right to be forgotten might be used against these specific instances.

If the US were to pass such legislation, its not likely that right to be forgotten would apply to public figures acting publicly since that's a protected class of free speech.