Being involved in student organizations is one of the most rewarding aspects of being a Stevens student. It gives us an opportunity to invest our time and energy into something bigger, gives us chances at practicing soft skills, and encourages us to form communities within Stevens and make friends. The Stute, for example, operates similarly to a small business, without the stress of making a profit. But sometimes, the surrounding aspects of Stevens make our operation a bit more difficult.
To preface, The Stute, as you may know, is a completely student-run organization, and we depend heavily on the administration to convey information and add context to occurrences across campus. The first issue I want about is the network of responses from administrators is not a direct one. Nearly all responses given by administrators to The Stute during interviews or email inquiries are reviewed and revised by Sara Klein, Vice President for Student Affairs. While there is nothing inherently wrong about this pipeline, The Stute feels that it can sometimes take away from the interview. Writers reach out to administrators because they want to know the administrator’s perspective about a specific topic, not Stevens’ perspective. And yes, while the administrators do represent Stevens as an organization, their input serves as an outlet for students to understand the various positions held by the people who oversee our institution. Additionally, the revision of responses also sometimes removes student impact from a story. And reaching out to student workers directly, especially those under federal work-study, for their input can sometimes put them at risk of losing their jobs. In all, the integrity of administrative responses and the effects of student work has been watered-down for some time now. It’s quite upsetting to see students not being credited for their work and seeing the guarded responses from administrators as they are closely supervised (and, quite frankly, babysat) by upper administration.
Speaking of students not being credited for their work, I want to revisit the topic of compensating those who work for student organizations. As previously written by the current Managing Editor of The Stute, Keenan Yates, in her Letter to the Editor “The case for compensating student leaders,” (which I implore you to all read) Yates mentions, “Given that […] organizations require an extensive commitment from those in higher-level leadership positions, it makes sense that students would ask for financial compensation for their work.” Students in administrative, governmental, and media-based organizations put countless hours of work into their projects, initiatives, and goals. When you really think about it, it’s quite miraculous that organizations like the SGA, WCPR, and The Link (just to name a few), can accomplish so much with the collaboration of students, the exchange of ideas, and commitment to initiatives, all atop our part-time jobs, hours of school work, etc. Furthermore, student leaders are required to attend training during their term called leadership paths. In practice, leadership paths are great, as they prepare us for different administrative and social scenarios we may face as a leader. On the other hand, the program is dysfunctional and confusing to navigate; sessions are sometimes canceled, attendance is low, and the meetings are repetitive. For these sessions to have a real impact on student organizations, they need to be better structured. At the end of the day, the effort of student leaders and the work they produce is marketed by Stevens as a selling point for attending this institution. And if these leadership roles require serious training, then maybe they warrant some compensation as well.
Finally, there’s the matter of the University Center Complex. As I’ve lightly mentioned in previous editorials, The Stute’s office in the UCC is far too small. Compared to our previous office in what is now the Martha Bayard Stevens Hall, where The Stute had a large office with three closets, space for five desktop computers accompanied by desks and chairs, a large printer, whiteboards, a small conference table, and a bookable conference room right across our office, our space in the UCC can’t compare. While we are still extremely grateful to have office space, it barely provides us with enough space to have small meetings, let alone weekly meetings with our 20-person minor board or seven-person E-board. And while the shared layout space with The Link was theoretically a smart touch, in reality, it makes the office even more cramped than it already is. I wish that student organizations were involved in the conversation about the structure of our offices; for what was supposed to be a student-centric building, the spaces allocated for student organizations in the UCC were not nearly enough. Furthermore, the lack of conference spaces in the UCC is just as upsetting.
Overall, The Stute is certainly not some for-profit organization with the intent of slandering, but we do believe in speaking up for student organizations and bringing light to what we think can be changed at Stevens. To bring everything to perspective, there are still many aspects of Stevens student org culture that I am proud of. The monetary resources, the help from liaisons in planning events like Stute Weekend, the mentorship from our advisor Professor John Horgan, and the hours of effort put in by each Stute staff member gives us the foundation and support we need to consistently churn out issues every week. I don’t expect things to magically change overnight; it takes months of student input, debate, and planning to implement such changes. Despite this, students should not be afraid to communicate and advocate for what they believe in (something that Stevens students do well).
Be First to Comment