SA limits effectiveness with potential change in schedule of session
Photo/Mark Nash
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nullam vitae ullamcorper velit. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia curae;.
The Student Association needs to better gauge what changes will be effective.
In the past several weeks, SA has been reviewing a proposed constitution that is reminiscent of the one from the late 1990s. One component of the constitution includes altering the schedule of the session. If changed, the session would run the length of the academic year, rather than the calendar year.
The organization should remain aligned with the calendar year rather than align its session terms with the academic year as proposed.
Following the calendar year allows for a critical three-month summer period when assembly members can develop future plans. During this period, members can prepare for the fall semester accordingly.
More importantly, this break allows each member to reorganize in the event of a tumultuous spring term. As seen with the current session, the summer period has allowed SA members and cabinet members to correct any faults and regroup for the fall semester.
If the schedule is altered according to the new constitution, members of the organization will only have Winter Break — four weeks — to plan for a new term. This is not enough time for the assembly and president to plan for an effective second half of the session.
During Monday’s meeting, members of SA raised another consequence of altering the schedule. The change would allow second-semester seniors to be president, which might result in an ineffective term.
Seniors are the most eligible candidates for SA president because of their leadership experience and understanding of the organization. With this schedule change, they would run for office at the end of junior year and hold office for their entire senior year.
Although effectiveness varies depending upon leadership, the concentration and motivation of second semester senior leaders is questionable, particularly in the role of president. Second-semester seniors are often too focused on graduation and their future to concentrate on campus commitments.
The alteration in the sessions’ schedule lacks reasoning, and change should not be implemented unless it has a purpose.