14 Comments
Eric Cohn brings you the latest update on the process of selecting a new Dean of Undergraduate Student Life – this time, the noise is coming from your classmates.
Group leaders and prominent members of Columbia student government released a statement today alleging that student input was largely ignored in the decision-making process for the new Dean of Undergraduate Student Life. Last Monday, Associate Dean of Residential Life for CC/SEAS Cristen Kromm was appointed to the position, created after Columbia decided not to hire a new Dean of Student Affairs last spring.
The press release, signed by Columbia students tasked with aiding in the search process for the Dean of Undergraduate Student Life, aims primarily to dispel the impression “that student voices in the [decision-making] process were ‘invaluable,’” as Columbia would claim. The two groups of students—group leaders and student representatives—unanimously supported a candidate from among the three finalists. They later learned that this candidate never received an offer.
Columbia ultimately selected Dean Kromm, whom today’s statement opposes not for her qualifications but for the selection process itself. Considering Columbia has spent “tens of thousands of dollars” on hiring firms for past openings as well as for this one, it seems a little strange that the final selection came from the inside. Today’s statement criticizes Columbia on this point, writing that “the process has repeatedly been used to validate internal candidates rather than to make an informed selection.” Instead, they would like to see these funds go directly to the students.
Historically, these students have refrained from comment, “so as not to jeopardize opportunities for students to be included [in decision-making] in the future.” The alleged lack of student input in the selection of Dean of Undergraduate Student Life, with its particular relevance for students, seems to be the last straw.
You can read the full statement below, which hopes to prioritize “the needs and voices of students” in future hiring decisions.
Last semester, elected student representatives and student group leaders from across campus were invited separately to take part in the search process for the Dean of Undergraduate Student Life. After an extensive process of resume reviews, interviews, discussion, and report-writing, these two groups of students independently made unanimous recommendations to Deans Valentini and Boyce supporting the selection of a single candidate from among three finalists. It is clear to us that this candidate never received an offer.
Last Monday, CC and SEAS students were notified via email that Cristen Kromm, the associate dean of residential life, had been named to the position. Dean Kromm has been an advocate for students in various arenas. We are excited to see that she has already begun soliciting student feedback about key issues, and we all look forward to working with her to enhance student life at Columbia in the months and years ahead. Our concern is not with her, but rather, with the value that Columbia assigns to student voices in its search processes and its decision-making in general.
When students’ unanimous recommendations are ignored, we cannot stand by and let our peers believe that student voices in the process were “invaluable.” Collectively, we have been involved in numerous search processes over the years. Many of us have advocated vigorously for outstanding external candidates only to see an internal candidate appointed almost every time. With issues in the past, we were careful not to speak out about our concerns too publicly so as not to jeopardize opportunities for students to be included in the future. We also recognized that for many positions, students were one part of a constituency that also consisted of faculty and staff, and so our thoughts were not final. But in selecting the Dean of Undergraduate Student Life, student voices should have been prioritized. Since the evidence clearly demonstrates that student input is already of no consequence in search processes, we feel there is little risk in speaking up and asking for change.
The futility of this search came at a cost for all students. Columbia spends tens of thousands of dollars on executive search firms for almost every opening, funds that could be going back to enriching our campus and opening up more opportunities for students to attend. We can all agree that the University should be seeking to find the best talent, but when the process has repeatedly been used to validate internal candidates rather than to make an informed selection, it is difficult to believe that the goal in using these firms is really to find the best person for the job.
Columbia students are deeply dedicated to enhancing co-curricular opportunities for our peers and fostering a supportive community. As students ourselves, we directly experience the challenges and opportunities Columbia offers and are ultimately the most connected to the student experience. We hope that in future hiring decisions, the needs and voices of students will be prioritized.
Respectfully,
Omar Abboud, SEAS’16
Peter Bailinson, CC’16
Allie Carieri, CC’15
Adam Chelminski, SEAS’17
Yilma Choudhury, CC’15
Fatimatou Diallo, CC’15
Marc Heinrich, CC’16
Tammuz Huberman, CC’15
Malini Nambiar, SEAS’15
Jared Odessky, CC’15
Jillian Ross, SEAS’16
Ari Schuman, CC’15
Mandeep Singh, CC’15
Sejal Singh, CC’15
Ramis Wadood, CC’16
Brian Wu, SEAS’15
Loading …
14 Comments
@Amen I’m so sick of administrators giving students token input, then completely ignoring everything we have to say. This pattern happens all the time.
@So Student leaders throw a pissy fit and then go back to sucking up to administrators.
@"pissy fit" Do you ever talk to people or just catch snippets of conversation from afar, mangling their vernacular?
@About Time Glad to see students finally standing up for themselves when the administration screws us
@Anonymous YEA THAT’LL SHOW ‘EM!!!!!!!
@Well said. This is also probably a list of sachems!
@HBD Props to Eric Cohn for covering this important news on his BIRTHDAY!
@Anonymous Instead, with the tens of thousands of dollars, Columbia could afford palates of salt AND to actually spread it on the ice
@that guy pallet.
@Anonymous It’s a commentary on the duality of man, gosh.
@CC '16 Well said.
– Member of last year’s committee
@Another committee member Remember this?
Dear Students,
Following today’s announcement, we wanted to take a moment to thank you for participating in the search by taking the time to meet with candidates for the Dean of Undergraduate Student Affairs position earlier this month. We are thankful for the time and effort you took to be part of this process.
Even though the search did not result in the expected outcome, the process brought up some very good questions for us about the best structure for our student programs and services, and we are looking forward to the upcoming changes. Despite our decision not to extend an offer to either candidate, we ask that you continue to maintain the highest level of confidentiality regarding the identity of the candidates, as we do not want to compromise their current positions.
Thank you again for your help with this process.
@yet another committee member NEVER got that email. Also that’s from last year it seems.
@And of course The EVP of Student Affairs position was eliminated to instead create the EVP for University Life position, which has actually already been filled by Suzanne Goldberg. Another example of how students have been left out of the picture.