Letters To The Editor
Megan Braun | Oct 18, 2009 | Comments 1
A recent New University commentary accused Chancellor Drake of being “reclusive and unresponsive to students, workers and faculty.” In my experience as a student and ASUCI President, this has not been my experience to date.
I would agree that the lottery system creates the appearance of inaccessibility because it appears as though the odds against getting a meeting are extraordinarily high. However, though Chancellor Drake is not able to meet individually with all of the students on this campus, he is still intimately aware of our needs and interacts with students on a regular basis.
Just last week Chancellor Drake had 20 students over at his house for dinner and he regularly visits different student functions like the Administrative Intern class, Greek Awards, the annual Powwow and the Olive Tree Initiative. There are regular monthly meetings for Chancellor Drake to meet with elected student government officials and he meets one on one with the ASUCI and AGS presidents at least once a quarter or as needed. For a person with such tremendous responsibility, I think this shows a sincere effort to be accessible to students.
There is also a common misperception that the chancellor, as the head of this university, is the best person to solve students’ problems. I would argue that the person at the top of any major university should spend a majority of his time working with their executive team, with special attention paid to student leaders as time permits. The chancellor is responsible for providing oversight to the university’s business services, academic programs, budget, research and advancement in addition to student affairs. While the power of the chancellorship has a certain allure, it is important for the chancellor to preserve the decision-making power of his team and it is usually more effective to work with an administrator who specializes in the issue you are working on. In my first term as ASUCI President, I never once found it necessary to go straight to the Chancellor on an issue. Normally, I would start by working with the director of a unit like housing or dining and then work my way up to a vice chancellor. So students who have a concern should consider which administrator is best suited to help them before they seek out Chancellor Drake.
Finally, students need to remember that they have representatives who are responsible for advocating to the chancellor on students’ behalf. The ASUCI and AGS presidents have direct access to the chancellor and can get a meeting whenever they need to. If students have issues that they are concerned about, they should first seek out their elected student leaders. The presidents have extensive knowledge of campus politics so they can often advocate more effectively than the average student. We are more than happy to champion any issue at the highest levels of the administration.
Students do have a forum for voicing their concerns to Chancellor Drake, whether it is through office hours or the student government. I would argue that the entire UCI administration is committed to promoting this university, and I want to know if any student has not received satisfactory service from a school official. The chancellor takes the needs of all students very seriously. Whether it be discussing the potential increases in student fees, arguing that faculty should not be taking furloughs on instructional days when students are entitled to learn or considering changes in the campus smoking policy, Chancellor Drake is actively engaged in all areas of student life. Students may not always agree with all his decisions, including the decision to do office hours by lottery, and that’s okay. But I argue that students should be standing in solidarity with our chancellor during a very challenging time and appreciating his commitment to the undergraduate experience.
Megan Braun is fifth-year history and philosophy double-major. She is president of ASUCI.
Popularity: unranked [?]
Filed Under: Opinion
I wrote the original article that Megan is responding to. I know that the administration is very receptive to some groups, and not to others. Basically, this is the litmus test for meeting with groups: If the change that the group wants is controversial or would hurt the corporate interests of the university, no meeting will ever take place, unless students can mobilize effectively and find other ways to put pressure on the university. Other groups, specifically social clubs and very moderate environmental groups, do have the ear of the administration, and much of the sustainability work has been done with cooperation between administrators and students.
But issues like labor are different. Environmental policy can be paraded by administration to show how progressive and eco-friendly they are (although we have seen the administration repeatedly lie). However, when it comes to labor (eg paying our workers more), the administration has no problem bargaining in bad faith, suppressing wages, firing organizers, and threatening female workers, anything to keep costs down. Despite Drake’s comments to protesters at the University Club last winter, there are no proper channels to work through, and believe me when I say we’ve tried. Many of the administrators in the units, such as John Daly, are pathological liars, openly racist, and completely uninterested in collaboration.
More importantly though, is that all of these “proper channels,” when they do exist, are hidden from students or unproductive. When students began looking at where UCI clothing is made, specifically targeting Russell Athletic (there was a New U article back in April I think), we couldn’t find any information about who to even talk to. It wasn’t until that article was published that we found some contacts, who have since ignored our attempts to meet. But at other universities, in fact every university that I’m aware of, sweatshop activists have ALWAYS initiated contact with the Chancellor or President first, and the Chancellor would delegate further work to Vice Chancellors or special assistants, or take care of the matter themselves. Often, it’s a mixture of the two.
And when very controversial issues emerge which are deeply entrenched in power and financial structures, such as around animal testing (yes, animals like cats are killed on campus), administrators will without a doubt refuse to meet with students much less concede anything. Then what?
For many UCI students, I suppose that Drake’s behavior seems acceptable. But for many grad students and transfer students who have been involved in activism elsewhere, we understand just how sub-par it is compared to most other institutions of comparable size and quality. Quite honestly, it’s embarrassing how bad it is here, and my friends at other UC, CSU, Big Ten, ACC, and East Coast schools have been speechless when I’ve described Drake’s behaviors.
As for AGS and ASUCI, many of us who have dealt with these organizations have been turned off because of the unnavigable bureaucracy and crabby staff, and again they are organized very differently than most other universities. This also says nothing of the many rumors and allegations of subordination to the administration–closed meetings, instructions for votes, etc–which defeats the purpose of more conflictual organizing and dissuades many activists from even approaching ASUCI/AGS.