2008 Woodie Awards
StuCo should shift to greater advocacy
Issue date: 5/1/08
I have been a part of the Student Council for four years and write this as a final effort to advance a body I respect so much. My four years have convinced me that the Council is composed of some of the most ambitious, dynamic and compassionate individuals at Hopkins. I have also come to believe that the Council must change. Here I will list the current dilemmas and advance a course of action.
The issues the Student Council faces are both internal and external. The first is an emphasis on the administrative. Committees like COLA and Authorization get bogged down in paperwork and endless interviews. While leadership appointments and student group approval are important tasks, they do not advance student interests. They are the acts of a bureaucrat, not of an advocate. The new constitution will hopefully spread the workload a bit, though the same redundant tasks remain.
There is a lack of cooperation from the administration. This stems not from disrespect but from a conflict of interests. The deans at Hopkins are caring individuals, but they are also employees of Hopkins. Often the larger interests of the University conflict with those of its students. This leads to students being closed out of critical decisions regarding health care, tuition and the presidential search committee of late. Without being included in such decisions, the Council remains hamstrung.
As a result of this imposed ignorance, the Council appears reactionary and inept. Such a perception is common among students and while undeserved, it is understandable. Students then check out, leaving the Council impotent. Without the political capital an engaged student body provides, the Council can never have legitimacy.
In an effort to stem this, Hopkins has made a commendable effort to incorporate the students into the decision-making process through liaisons. This has backfired. Student Council has become so entrenched in the lower echelon of this mechanism that it deludes itself into a false sense of inclusion.
The issues the Student Council faces are both internal and external. The first is an emphasis on the administrative. Committees like COLA and Authorization get bogged down in paperwork and endless interviews. While leadership appointments and student group approval are important tasks, they do not advance student interests. They are the acts of a bureaucrat, not of an advocate. The new constitution will hopefully spread the workload a bit, though the same redundant tasks remain.
There is a lack of cooperation from the administration. This stems not from disrespect but from a conflict of interests. The deans at Hopkins are caring individuals, but they are also employees of Hopkins. Often the larger interests of the University conflict with those of its students. This leads to students being closed out of critical decisions regarding health care, tuition and the presidential search committee of late. Without being included in such decisions, the Council remains hamstrung.
As a result of this imposed ignorance, the Council appears reactionary and inept. Such a perception is common among students and while undeserved, it is understandable. Students then check out, leaving the Council impotent. Without the political capital an engaged student body provides, the Council can never have legitimacy.
In an effort to stem this, Hopkins has made a commendable effort to incorporate the students into the decision-making process through liaisons. This has backfired. Student Council has become so entrenched in the lower echelon of this mechanism that it deludes itself into a false sense of inclusion.
Be the first to comment on this story