Imagine possibilities.
One of the things, this year, that I have been learning is my own interest in student/campus politics. I guess part of what fuels this interest is this belief that the universities are the grounds intended to foster the movers and shakers of tomorrow. The example that is set in the student environments is what will be followed by these professionals-to-be to shape the future. People go to universities not just to learn, but to grow.
The past couple of months Dalhousie had tried to put through improvements that were under the name "Imagine" (which I probably followed way too closely for my own good) I did some research, followed what was said, informed myself about the issues, and learned that I would not be able to vote in a process that could lead to construction projects that I would have to pay for. I never realized how much value a vote can have until I couldn't have one. Much of the process was covered in the Dalhousie Gazette (the Dal student paper) which gave me a new understanding to the importance of media to politics. The referendum did not pass. I wanted to express my feelings on the matter after the fact and wrote a letter to the Gazette about the matter.
For your reading pleasure, this is that letter:
Letter #1: Imagine community
It's been a few days since we noted the passing of the "Imagine" project. My interest had piqued when I first learned that the plan would be guided by student input to make improvements in the campus community. It sounded great! I decided, however, that I would not support the project during the Jan 31 presentation, when students were denied an open-mike question and answer period. That, to me, was symbolic.
When the question of the King's vote became an issue, the response of the administration was not to solve the problem but to invent the notion that King's students were foreigners on a Dalhousie landscape only solidified my feelings. These remarks indicated that the people making them were out of touch with the Dal student populace, in which King's students are integrated in almost every discipline and at almost every level.
Yes, King's and Dal are two different universities. They each have their own independent thought, focus and outlook but are intertwined in almost every other way possible. Their relationship is more like Siamese-twins: completely independent minds with independent problems and solutions, but sharing many essential organs. There is more in common than geography. They are interlaced. Each benefits from the other's success, and collaborative efforts between them have produced amazing results for over eighty years.
While I was glad when I heard the results of the vote, part of me wonders what will happen to that wonderful spirit I saw: student involvement to improve their university and community. Can that spirit be manifest without new buildings? At the original academy, students were taught under a grove of olive trees; they didn't need buildings for a great education.
The referendum results indicated that students want to find another way to improve the community then the creation of new buildings. More questions come of this: Can we take better care of the ones we have? Would some bright paint and living plants bring life back to the Life Science Centre? Will the DSU try to capitalize on the recent attention to try to increase voter turn out? (I'm sure that they'd like approval to go beyond 10%) Will the administration try to find another way to improve the campus community and the quality of education? Will the different parts of the bodies cooperate to keep alive the spirit that glimmered at the heart of their imaginations, to make things better? Can this spirit thrive without unnecessary construction projects?
A great community is built by great people. There is a wealth of great people on the campus' now, and I'll bet that it will cost less then $25 million dollars to engage them. Now I ask: are the administration and student governments up to the task to do so?
Scott Richey
My letter could be printed, I learned, but I would have to trim it down to 200 words, half the legnth of my original. So I re-submitted:
Letter #2: Imagine Respect
My interest piqued when I first learned that students were to be the guiding force behind the "imagine" project to improve campus community, and was immediately let down at the Jan 31 presentation: it was too controlled.
When King's became an issue, the response was not to fix the problem, but invent a notion that King's students were foreigners on Dal soil. Such remarks indicated that the individuals making them, at Dal admin and DSU, are out of touch with the Dal student populace, in which King's students are integrated in almost every discipline and at almost every level.
King's and Dal are different schools, each with their own independent thought, focus, and identity, however many of their resources pooled together. Each benefits from the other's successes and they have been cooperating for over 80 years to produce amazing results. That relationship deserves to be respected.
A great community is built by great people, a great education requires great people and the foundation of both is respect.
There is a wealth of great people on the campus' now, and I'll bet that it will cost less then $25 million dollars to engage them. Now I ask: are the administration and student governments up to the task to do so?
Scott Richey
So another thing that I've learned is that it's hard to fit a whole idea into such a short space. Kudos to you folk who are able. It isn't a stregnth of mine yet.
-s
The past couple of months Dalhousie had tried to put through improvements that were under the name "Imagine" (which I probably followed way too closely for my own good) I did some research, followed what was said, informed myself about the issues, and learned that I would not be able to vote in a process that could lead to construction projects that I would have to pay for. I never realized how much value a vote can have until I couldn't have one. Much of the process was covered in the Dalhousie Gazette (the Dal student paper) which gave me a new understanding to the importance of media to politics. The referendum did not pass. I wanted to express my feelings on the matter after the fact and wrote a letter to the Gazette about the matter.
For your reading pleasure, this is that letter:
Letter #1: Imagine community
It's been a few days since we noted the passing of the "Imagine" project. My interest had piqued when I first learned that the plan would be guided by student input to make improvements in the campus community. It sounded great! I decided, however, that I would not support the project during the Jan 31 presentation, when students were denied an open-mike question and answer period. That, to me, was symbolic.
When the question of the King's vote became an issue, the response of the administration was not to solve the problem but to invent the notion that King's students were foreigners on a Dalhousie landscape only solidified my feelings. These remarks indicated that the people making them were out of touch with the Dal student populace, in which King's students are integrated in almost every discipline and at almost every level.
Yes, King's and Dal are two different universities. They each have their own independent thought, focus and outlook but are intertwined in almost every other way possible. Their relationship is more like Siamese-twins: completely independent minds with independent problems and solutions, but sharing many essential organs. There is more in common than geography. They are interlaced. Each benefits from the other's success, and collaborative efforts between them have produced amazing results for over eighty years.
While I was glad when I heard the results of the vote, part of me wonders what will happen to that wonderful spirit I saw: student involvement to improve their university and community. Can that spirit be manifest without new buildings? At the original academy, students were taught under a grove of olive trees; they didn't need buildings for a great education.
The referendum results indicated that students want to find another way to improve the community then the creation of new buildings. More questions come of this: Can we take better care of the ones we have? Would some bright paint and living plants bring life back to the Life Science Centre? Will the DSU try to capitalize on the recent attention to try to increase voter turn out? (I'm sure that they'd like approval to go beyond 10%) Will the administration try to find another way to improve the campus community and the quality of education? Will the different parts of the bodies cooperate to keep alive the spirit that glimmered at the heart of their imaginations, to make things better? Can this spirit thrive without unnecessary construction projects?
A great community is built by great people. There is a wealth of great people on the campus' now, and I'll bet that it will cost less then $25 million dollars to engage them. Now I ask: are the administration and student governments up to the task to do so?
Scott Richey
My letter could be printed, I learned, but I would have to trim it down to 200 words, half the legnth of my original. So I re-submitted:
Letter #2: Imagine Respect
My interest piqued when I first learned that students were to be the guiding force behind the "imagine" project to improve campus community, and was immediately let down at the Jan 31 presentation: it was too controlled.
When King's became an issue, the response was not to fix the problem, but invent a notion that King's students were foreigners on Dal soil. Such remarks indicated that the individuals making them, at Dal admin and DSU, are out of touch with the Dal student populace, in which King's students are integrated in almost every discipline and at almost every level.
King's and Dal are different schools, each with their own independent thought, focus, and identity, however many of their resources pooled together. Each benefits from the other's successes and they have been cooperating for over 80 years to produce amazing results. That relationship deserves to be respected.
A great community is built by great people, a great education requires great people and the foundation of both is respect.
There is a wealth of great people on the campus' now, and I'll bet that it will cost less then $25 million dollars to engage them. Now I ask: are the administration and student governments up to the task to do so?
Scott Richey
So another thing that I've learned is that it's hard to fit a whole idea into such a short space. Kudos to you folk who are able. It isn't a stregnth of mine yet.
-s