The Deans' Cabal

I’m not going to lie—I’m easily confused. Yet, there’s nothing about the Academy that confuses me more than the Deans’ Council. To my knowledge, the Council is an unelected body designed to offer student commentary on proposals from the administration. My understanding is not concrete, though, because all I know is what has slipped from the tightly guarded lips of the Council’s members. How can it be, if—in the words of a Deans’ Council member—secrecy is part of the point?

I have questions about the need for this cabalistic group. The student body has multiple representative institutions, any of which can replace Deans’ Council. To seek feedback from a confined group of students, the Deans need only call a closed-door session of Student Council, which is comprised of the Executive Board and Class Representatives. Certainly, a group elected by their peers is capable of offering suggestions on new policy initiatives. Why, then, does Deans’ Council exist?

Even if the need is legitimate, the method in which Deans’ Council is run strikes me as warranting more investigation. The group’s newest members are not nominated by their peers. Instead, students representing diverse perspectives are invited to participate by the Student Council Executive Board.

To me, this self-perpetuating cycle ensures only certain students have a voice. While the Executive Board represents the student body, it should not be tasked with finding students that have diverse opinions. It cannot achieve this goal because its members don’t know every student on campus, and they certainly do not know everyone’s opinions. As debates about differing viewpoints rage on campus, how is it that nobody has pointed to Deans’ Council as a conduit through which certain voices are given more weight?

Furthermore, self-perpetuation opens the door to a floodgate of nepotistic appointments. This is particularly true for an organization, such as Deans' Council, that does not require applications of any form. Does any accountability exist in the nomination and appointment process? If not, I struggle to understand how Deans' Council can play a part in critical decision-making.

Furthermore, it is clear to me that a sizable portion of the student body has no awareness of Deans’ Council’s existence. If this Council—a secretive group of individuals who wield an inordinate amount of power—existed in any other context, immediate connections would be drawn to tyranny. The Academy has banned all secret societies, so what makes this group different?

Three months ago, I sat amongst an off-guard audience as Tony Downer announced Principal William Rawson’s appointment. While I welcomed the appointment itself, I was struck by something Downer said—the student body’s input had been in the form of Deans' Council. I was stunned by this declaration. How could the Trustees think that the Deans' Council was an accurate representation of the entire student body? What kind of input did these individuals provide? These are questions that need to be asked, and they are ones that may never be answered.

I am grateful that the deans are making an effort to hear student voices. I firmly believe, however, that this is not the way they should be doing it. If the administration truly wants balanced viewpoints, it should consider according the student body at-large a say in who serves on a representative committee. I see representation and self-perpetuation as intrinsically irreconcilable. I am not condemning the students on Deans' Council, nor am I condemning the administrators who established it. To borrow the eloquence of Stephen McNulty, “I am not angry—merely confused and concerned.”