There is a standard of accountability within government, which serves as a model that we, as consumers of education, have or should have as an implied right. It is founded upon the concept of democratic governance, provides for redress, enables public oversight of government policy and administration, and serves to positively direct conflict and enhance rational legislation and public policy for the common good.
The Administrative Procedures Act is how America makes the day-to-day business of public policy accessible to and reviewable by the citizens. As a model for how government—indeed, how higher education business—is or should be done, it behooves us to consider using its paradigm as the way policy changes should be implemented. An administrative procedure based on this model serves not only to reduce conflict, but also to enable mature, rational policy development in a positive environment of student interest and involvement. In short, it provides hope and not disillusionment where change is involved.
It is amazing, given the experience of American colleges during the Vietnam era, that accountability through public disclosure, comment, and administrative and judicial review have not been built into how school administrations implement policy change in a modern democracy.
There is not a single Ivy League university or technical institute in America that would deny that they foster a belief in American democracy and the principles of popular sovereignty. Yet our own has not even developed the simple benefit of providing fair and adequate public notice and public comment for major policy changes that will effect the very character and face of this school population. Rather, it appears, only the expediencies of wealth and political privilege rule administration and financial policy. If the administrators want bean counters rather than intellectuals and humanitarians to run the admissions and financial policy of this school, so be it—but let those accountants be answerable to the consumers and purchasers, that is, the students and their parents of this institute; for Enron has shown this generation of students that ethical standards of accountants have fewer reservations than they once did.
The issue with the administration’s two new policy changes is not the wisdom of the new policies regarding commencement and graduate tuition, but rather the process by which policy was made. How does the administration know that these policies are beneficial to the students and the Institution in the long run? Just because they can afford a school-paid-for vacation in Florida does not mean the decisions made there result from good thinking. Wait until our parents find out the administration took a “retreat” to Florida in order discuss the idea of doubling graduate tuition. Sounds downright Enron-ish to me.
In an institution of higher education, with a wealth of brainpower, policy decisions should be worked out with students, not based on statistics and what other universities and institutions “in our basket” do.
Regardless of who makes the final decision, the important point is that policies are announced and immediately implemented without the opportunity for review or comment. The two problems that always arise in current procedures are 1) acceptance: Sudden policy changes always seem suspicious; and 2) compliance: Because people are unprepared for the changes, a plethora of exceptions have to be made, and the exceptions, themselves, become policy causing bureaucratic overload. Frustration, confusion, anger, disappointment, powerlessness, and indifference are generated because no period for adjustment or regrouping is allowed, and rather than a clear and meaningful policy being implemented, a series of exceptions are granted, subverting the policy. Exceptions do not have to be created if there are timely notice, public comment, and public reporting.
This idea of public comment is not new to RPI. We already have a model for it in our cafeteria administration. What is being called for here, however, is the further power to affect decision making and to do that we may very well have to exercise our right to redress grievances through the tried and true tradition of a referendum petition. I can think of no better way to inspire involvement and foster accountability than a petition calling for the institution of an administrative procedures policy demanding timely disclosure, public comment, public reporting, and fair notice prior to implementation.
