Earlier this month, my fellow columnist, Nazar Aljassar, published a column entitled “Another kind of diversity” in which he argued that CIOs at the University should create leadership positions geared exclusively toward first- and second-year students.
Aljassar highlights an obstacle that CIOs on grounds encounter: student apathy. I certainly agree this is a significant problem that needs to be addressed; however, I would not link student apathy to lack of leadership positions for younger students. On the contrary, I believe student apathy is much more influenced by the fact that many students feel that it is impossible to get involved in an organization unless you join right when you enter the University. Creating leadership roles just for younger students is not the best way to tackle this problem, and may even take us further away from the goal of consistent student engagement.
As an out-of-state student, I had no idea which organizations I wanted to join once I arrived on Grounds. It took a period of trial and error (which is ongoing) to get somewhat settled into my niche. While my experience is perhaps the more common one, I recognize many students at the University may have a different experience. Those who come to the University with familial or social links already in place may have a firm idea in their minds about what their place at the University is.
However, no matter your background coming into the University, first- and second-year students usually do not have the experience to jump right into leadership positions. That is not to say that there are not any exceptions to this generalization. As Aljassar points out, age diversity does exist within the leadership structures of certain organizations at the University, such as StudCo. In my own experience, I have seen first- and second-year students perform outstandingly in leadership positions. However, these positions were ones that were not carved out just for them. Rather, they were positions that were up for grabs for everyone. This assures the younger students who get these positions have demonstrated their qualifications in comparison to all of their peers. We should be wary of potentially sacrificing quality of leadership for age diversity.
Not all student apathy comes from inability to join organizations. Many students feel more generally uninvolved and disconnected, and don’t necessarily have the desire to engage with CIOs and organizations on Grounds. Many organizations seem to have a ladder system in place for gaining leadership positions, in which student leaders ascend the first rung of the ladder the first semester of their first year. To be clear, my argument is not that first- and second-years should not hold leadership positions. On the contrary, I believe that inspired younger students can do just as great of a job as older students with far more experience. I simply do not think organizations should implement quotas for younger students, or create specific roles only for younger students. When leadership seems predetermined in any way, students disengage.
It is true that organizations are usually led by entirely new groups of people each year. However, that does not mean the new leaders have no experience in the groups, or have not been involved since first year (often they have). Aljassar states that students only have a year to effectuate change once they gain leadership, when in fact they have time both before and after assuming their position to do so. In addition, it is possible for new leaders to continue initiatives started by their predecessors. Consider, for example, the implementation of the Informed Retraction in 2013, an effort carried out by two consecutive Honor chairs.
The problems addressed by Aljassar do not call for an institutional change. Perhaps there should be more emphasis on mentorship between new and old leaders. In addition, clubs could actively try to recruit older students to enrich the membership of their organizations and discourage complacency.
The notion that students arrive on grounds ready to take on leadership positions in CIOs or organization is usually untrue. If students do not have the experience of being a general member, they will have neither the insight nor the motivation to be an active an effective leader. While I commend Aljassar’s emphasis on age diversity, I think his proposed method of tackling disengagement with CIOs and student initiatives will only aggravate this problem by creating more barriers for students to join organizations later in their University careers.
Mary Russo is an Opinion Columnist for The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at m.russo@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 8 hours agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | April 17, 2024In addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
