Enough. We need to talk. Students deserve respect as adults. The utter degrading lack of communication from the administration to the student body has reached the limit. Saint Louis University’s policies affecting student organizations comes parading towards us dressed in mockery and distrust.
Una, Rainbow Alliance, Black Student Alliance, Students United for Palestine, and a considerable number of other student organizations that fall under the CCC all now have to submit additional forms to the CCC in order to book events on campus; only after CCC approval can these groups submit forms to Student Involvement. This, and a large, jumbled plethora of other forms, regulations and advisor changes, has formed a barrage of initiatives that have left students blind sided, confused and angry.
To what purpose is SLU dismembering its student events policies? We do not know. There are two ideas that we can grasp, however.
First, the administration has apparently tabbed students under some label of “Philistines” in their record books. It’s obvious from the silence on their part and their increased bureaucratic controls (without student feedback) that they fear us. They fear students will not act rationally or responsibly; if they tell us their reasoning behind their actions, there might be protests like the ones last year. Is there something to hide, then?
This distrust and secrecy alone is causing the effect they want to avoid. The policies concern student organizations, the leaders of which are some of the most intelligent and respectable students on campus. It is insulting to feel like lambs; they expect us to meekly, timidly accept these rules – rules that come with neither explanation nor consultation, rules cloaked in mistrust.
Second, we can perhaps think of ways SLU is trying to improve. We want to give them the benefit of the doubt that there is some greater good to be reached through these new policies. However, we can’t see the truth in that idea when the administration puts little faith in students to provide guiding and intelligent suggestions as to how policies need to be framed. It more honestly appears to us as if they are trying to push students far away from administrative decision making, and not at all trying to improve our University. This might not be the intent; but again, we don’t know their intentions when nothing has been communicated.
Vague replies – far from avoiding exposure and thus anger and controversy – are destroying the administration’s credibility for the student body; people are angry already.
We demand communication. There is such a thing as a student voice. We cannot let SLU bypass us. We need to send a message, a message that we are here. We are active.
We are listening, and hearing nothing. We ask critical questions, and receive tepid, political and dodgy answers. We are tired of it. We need explanations, even if they might cause controversy.
Prove to us that you are capable of opening up, and give us an opportunity to prove to you that we can behave like the adults we truly are. Let’s sit down, open up, and work this out together. Let’s talk.
Lauren Araujo • Feb 6, 2011 at 1:25 pm
In response to Anna’s comment:
If we’re going to get facts correct, then let’s start with this one: these new policies are not applied to all CSO’s otherwise the meeting that the UNews was reporting on would have been comprised of more CSO’s than simply those who fall under the CCC. The entire reason this meeting was directed at CSO’s under the CCC (coming from someone who was there) was that the process that we normally go through for events has changed. Now instead of bringing our paperwork directly to Student Involvement, cultural and social justice CSO’s must go through the CCC first. From there, the CCC must ‘approve’ (although they don’t have the power to give us true approval) and then it goes to Student Involvement, but not through students. I see a few problems with this: first, this does create a longer process than other CSO’s because while other groups get a signature from their staff and/or faculty advisor, they are not getting approval.
Secondly, by having the staff of the CCC deliver the paperwork to Student Involvement, they are cutting out one more piece of interaction between students and the members of the administration that actually make decisions. This, for anyone who missed the town hall last year, was one of our largest complaints-the lack of connection and hence accountability of the administrators to the students they are here to help. This is also a response to your suggestion that we make appointments with staff of the Student Involvement Center; I have done that before and have been met with the response that the CCC staff should be filing them in, not me. This does not always happen and I actually have a fairly good working relationship with many people in that office, but it still leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.
When it comes to the responsibility that these policies are supposedly instilling in us, I would also like to set that record straight from a leader of two very active groups. In our experience, we have to keep the Student Involvement Center accountable in order to properly plan our events. We have turned in paperwork for an event in the following semester (obviously planned for well in advance) and have gone two months without a response from the Student Involvement Center. While we are planning in advance, we cannot continue planning when it takes so long to get a response on whether or not our event is even allowed. The Student Involvement Center is supposed to respond to us five days after they receive our paperwork from the CCC (unlike other CSO?s), but when they don?t respond in a timely manner (something we have come to expect) we have to go in and make sure that they give us a response. Many times, at least for the CSO?s I?m involved in, this is a maybe (that we get reluctantly) that must lead to meetings to discuss the ?direction? of our event. These meetings are mandatory, but it is not uncommon that the staff members that we must meet with cannot meet with us for two weeks, at which point the event that is supposed to take place is fast approaching or already past.
So I ask the general SLU community that does not understand our frustration and considers us ?spoiled brats:? doesn?t it seem counter-intuitive to make a CSO hold the administration?s hand though every step of the planning process in order to create more self-sufficient and responsible student leaders? And this would only be slightly plausible if this system was working, but it?s not and it seems to me that the only people who know it?s not are those who are in these meetings, who are planning these events, and who are constantly being jerked around by a faceless administration that only wants accountability from one side of this partnership.
Anna • Feb 5, 2011 at 4:07 pm
You know what- enough IS enough. Enough of the UNews disregarding the truth in the name of showboating. You should really try checking your facts once in a while, and stop contradicting yourself within the same issue. For one, these policies do not apply to only CCC organizations- they are expected of all CSOs. Not to mention, as you pointed out in another article in this issue, they’ve technically been in place for the entire academic year, but were loosely enforced as to give organizations time to ‘adjust.’ As far as ‘ignoring’ our rights as students and members of CSOs to mandate university policies… since when do we have that right? It is not up to us as members of specific CSOs to expect to control the policies that apply to ALL CSOs. They are not required to ask our permission when changing events policies, and we shouldn’t expect them to.
I find it a bit immature that you are so frustrated that you are finally being held to a higher standard of responsibility- if you can even call it that. These policies are not extreme. In fact, I consider them to be extremely lax. Are you kidding me that you don’t know the general information about your large-scale events 20 days in advance? I’ve personally seen these forms a million times and do not consider them difficult to fill out. “Describe your event.” “Where will the event occur.” “How do you propose you will solve any problems that may arise?” etc. 2 and a half weeks in advance, you SHOULD know all of these details, and more! It is not insane for them to want a bit more structure from student orgs- after all, student’s tuition is going towards supporting your organizations and events, and if they are not planned and organized well you are merely wasting those funds.
If you have your date and time and location approved 20 days in advance, you will be able to utilize your programming to a much greater degree. Smaller organizations- who may not be able to compete with your large-scale event if they occur on the same day or are too similar- will have a greater chance of being successful in their programming as well. And the staff who are responsible for making sure you are successful as CSOs and that you are utilizing the money that SGA has allotted you in a responsible and appropriate manner will have a heck of a lot less stress to deal with.
For far too long have student organizations been able to walk into Student Life and demand that their every request be granted. In my opinion, you need to realize that people the real world are not going to bend over backwards in order to meet your every demand and fix your every problem.
They do not fear us. Why don’t you try making an appointment with the staff in Student Life, rather than just showing up at the front desk in the middle of their work day without so much as an e-mail warning? They would be more than happy to see you. Unless, of course, you continue to act like a spoiled brat- then they may begrudgingly see you. But they will see you nonetheless. They aren’t out to get you here- they are merely trying to make everyone’s life a little easier, and to ensure that we are not wasting student activity funds.
And as far as your comment, “there is such a thing as a student voice,” my only response is: what do you call this paper? Obviously YOUR voice is being heard. Or maybe I should say- unfortunately, your voice is being heard. And I for one, am sick of hearing it.
Thomas Bloom • Feb 4, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Here is some context Katie: https://www.unewsonline.com/2010/03/email-campaign-focuses-on-race-issues-2/
Katie • Feb 4, 2011 at 12:48 pm
For those of us who weren’t around last year, what were the protests about?