My last editorial expressed my concerns about how the administration hides behind its PR responses. And I would not be honest if I did not acknowledge how my week, once again, was consumed by issues revolving around the administration.
We are a student newspaper, and unlike many other organizations, we do not need to report to the administration. The Stute was created this way so the school does not filter our news. However, this does not mean that the school cannot make it difficult for us to find answers.
I find it interesting that on several occasions, Stevens boasts about having a highly intelligent student body. I have heard administrators talk about how Stevens attracts valedictorians and students from some of the most prestigious high schools in the country.
Yet, when discussing the transition to college, students are told that by being around other high-achieving students, our academic experience is that much more difficult. Students who were accustomed to receiving an easy A in high school are now expected to struggle and perhaps not feel nearly as successful as they once did. But this is college — we fail, we learn, and we get right back up again. Stevens teaches us to do just that.
But does the administration practice what it preaches?
We understand that the administration will not always meet every goal it sets for itself. Circumstances change, priorities shift, and there are never-ending shifts in student needs. But when The Stute attempted to write an article about how the school had not met certain goals it had set for itself, we were met with silence.
The Stute was ghosted.
There seems to be a perception that I am searching for gossip or attempting to uncover dirty secrets that faculty members are trying to hide. In reality, I am just searching for each side of the story. My writers email basic questions about how and why decisions are made, only to receive carefully crafted PR responses or no response at all. It is deeply frustrating not only as Editor-in-Chief but as a student.
There is nothing wrong with failing. There is nothing wrong with having to reassess decisions, changing course, and trying again.
Academic institutions across the country are facing the same hardships Stevens faces. But when Stevens is asked why certain goals were not met or why certain decisions were made, our questions are too often left unanswered.
I think most students can agree with me on this: Owning a misjudgment or a mistake and acknowledging that plans have changed is respectable. I want administrators to acknowledge when something did not go according to plan, rather than treating us as though we are out to expose them.
You tell us to fail and get back up again, but how can you preach that lesson when you refuse to admit failure in the first place? It is the reluctance to admit failure that can create a stigma around struggle. And that sends the wrong message to students.
We are angry, not just because the administration has pushed writers away from journalism with their responses, but because we expected more. I expected honesty, transparency, and a little trust.
And as for The Stute, if we do not get enough information to publish an article, we will find it. The fact that we could not publish an article one week does not mean that we will not get back up and try again.
The stories that are relevant to Stevens and are a part of our history deserve to be told — failures and all. And as a student, we aren’t asking Stevens to be perfect. We are asking Stevens to be honest when it’s not.
