When I was twelve-years-old, my mother quit her job. At the time, she was the vice president of the hospital for which she worked. Growing up, I occasionally worked weekends with my mom when she was Administrator on Duty (AOD). Since I was of age to remember, my mom and I would go to the hospital on those weekends, get a donut at the Dunkin’ downstairs, and I would watch as people chased her down with questions and concerns; she would calm them down and promptly respond to whatever was thrown her way. My naive twelve-year-old mind could not fathom why anyone would give up what I saw as a super cool job where you got to eat donuts and help everyone all day long. It wasn’t until years later that I realized my mother’s resignation was the greatest form of advocacy I’ve witnessed. My mother had a sexist and malicious boss for years; this inhibited her ability to grow as a professional and, most importantly, be present for our family. Today, part of my mother’s work is coaching young female leaders to know they always have a seat at the table.
Last November, I was elected President of the Student Government Association (SGA). Each year, a small cohort of students across the country is selected as the chief advocate of their respective student body. The responsibilities are unique based on the institution; however, we’re all united in that we aspire to make an ambitious and long-lasting impact on our peers. Despite these ambitions, one word can derail that appetite for change: “No.”
Students are removed from many of the decisions that affect the student experience. The experience in undergraduate education is changing across America: the focus of college education has become identity development in recent years. Access to higher education is an ever-mounting burden on students. The reputations of elite institutions have declined at the top US schools. Universities are spending like crazy, including steep increases in staff and administrative hiring. Student affairs administrators at some institutions impose and enforce far-reaching and broad community standards that predicate the type of speech allowed, conduct policies, selection processes for resources, and more. At some institutions, the enforcement of these community standards has led to a student committing suicide.
Anecdotally, I constantly listen to my friends and peers’ criticisms of the student experience. As students, increasing administrative presence and student support mean more and more is being decided for us. There has never been a greater imperative to get involved and find your seat at the table. Without students involved in these conversations, our voices would not be heard.
Student leaders and administrators have one thing in common: we’re all trying to improve. In my experience, every administrator I’ve worked with is here for the right reason. They want to make a difference in students’ lives.
I wholeheartedly believe that the practices students fight against were well-intentioned, and depending on the context, I support the efforts of administrators. Higher education leaders put in place to improve our student experience. But at what point do students get to intervene and dissent? When you advocate for yourself, what do you do as a student when you hear the inevitable “no” and your voice feels lost?
As SGA President, I have taken my fair share of “no” from university leaders. I share with you some strategies I’ve learned to keep pushing forward. As my mom regularly reminds me, even in the face of “no,” you always have a seat at the table:
1. Understand why they haven’t changed already: A prominent social psychologist from The Wharton School, Jonah Berger, researched how to change someone’s mind. The most important question he details in his book, The Catalyst, is asking why people haven’t changed. Asking the right questions is vital to understanding an issue’s background, history, and complexities, and it serves as the best starting point to get past no. For instance, every year, there is a renewed push from a new group of students to address the Gateway North building’s naming. Ambitious student leaders renewed their push to remove the name of the donor of the building because his political and social views do not align with the values of our campus. What is often missed from this approach is understanding why the university hasn’t changed already. In this case, both parties are contractually obligated to keep the name on the building. If you understand why people haven’t changed already, you can save your ideas and energy and better direct it toward solutions that are more within reach and can be addressed faster.
2. Work with what already exists (The Endowment Effect): People value things they own and do more than their actual value. Particularly in the context of a university, stakeholders have an emotional attachment to buildings and programs that may no longer be a priority, but because of the perceived value being greater than the actual value, universities often don’t take things away; we rarely eliminate programs, knock down buildings that don’t work anymore, or counsel faculty and staff to leave when they no longer embody the values of our community. Part of this is due to many stakeholders, alumni, who have a say. When making a change, consider the existing processes rather than starting something new or destroying something that’s been built. For example, this semester, the SGA is investigating the promotion process of tenured faculty members. We are exploring this because, anecdotally, students find tenured faculty members to be the least student-centric. Originally as a solution, we considered adding a new step to the promotion process. Instead, since we already highlight excellent faculty members via surveys and award nominations with this data, we can create a formalized list of rising star faculty, so we ensure that student-centric professors do not go unrecognized. In my experience, there is an intense emotional attachment to the process and university infrastructure. Student leaders must move fast to achieve their vision because time on campus is limited. Consider working with the things that already exist because people are emotionally attached to them, and change can occur much faster—sometimes—if you use what’s already available to the stakeholders involved.
3. Reframe your approach and reasoning for change: Getting to the root of a stakeholder’s motivation is vital to help you best frame your change request. One of the first large initiatives I worked on in the SGA was mid-semester course surveys. The objective of mid-semester course surveys includes giving students the opportunity for instructors to better align their course with students’ feedback mid-semester when there is time to change as opposed to the end of the semester. Originally, when I presented to our faculty senate, I framed this as being beneficial to students. Students had concerns, and they should be heard and changed before the course was over. This logic did not get much bite. However, when I reframed this solution to consider the perspective of the faculty, I tied the motivator to something important to them. Faculty have annual evaluations with the Dean. As part of this review, their student course survey responses are considered. I explained that mid-semester feedback was an opportunity for instructors to take in feedback and make changes so they are evaluated higher at the end of the semester. Faculty are incentivized to perform well in their course surveys because teaching awards are tied to their performance, which can help them with their promotions. Reframing your ambitions to align with the group you’re trying to mobilize is vital.
Students are not entitled to everything they want. There are constraints. But like my mom showed me, every person — every student, is entitled to express their opinion and advocate on their behalf. Some practices that deeply affect our lives as students are not decided by us. Students across the country are being spoken for by an increasing presence of university leaders. Overwhelmingly, university leaders are our partners. They are here to help us. However, in some cases, these systems lack student perspective and can be oppressive to student advocacy. This is the imperative to take your seat at the table.
