Another one bites the dust.
Earlier this week, the ASUU Senate Executive Committee turned down the proposed service learning requirement presented by ASUU President Patrick Reimherr and Vice President Jon Hayes.
The proposal would have required all U students to participate in community service or an internship, among other options, prior to graduation. The committee made the right choice to turn down the vague and cumbersome bill, but it never should have gotten that far in the first place. With little support in the Senate, one has to wonder why it was proposed in the first place.
The bottom line is that a growing number of initiatives made by this year’s Associated Students of the University of Utah administration have been failures. With the committee voting against his proposals, maybe Reimherr should rethink the way he is presenting, inventing and pursuing university projects.
In the case of the defeated service learning requirement, not enough research was gathered before it was presented. Even those who might have supported it were turned off by its ambiguity and lack of details.
A survey that was sent through e-mail to students was equally vague and distinctly biased. Instead of directly asking whether students would support a service credit, the survey asked broad questions about service in general. The survey seemed more a backhanded effort to sell the requirement to students than an honest method of gauging support.
Reimherr failed to generate support among a handful of senators before proposing the requirement. He should have sought more input from ASUU officials and students before pushing a specific bill.
Additionally, Reimherr, a Service Learning Scholar, said he had selected the project as his Integrative Service Project, which all students in the program must complete.
Although he said he had chosen to use the requirement as his project long after it was conceived, it still poses a conflict of interest. Any personal gain attached to a proposal that would affect thousands of students at the U shouldn’t be allowed and, whether well-intended or not, poses the question of whether Reimherr is working for the students, or himself.
In any case, the stubbornness with which the service requirement was shoved down the assembly line demonstrates bad leadership strategy.
ASUU also seems to suffer from a lack of communication, if not division. In October, The Chronicle wrote an editorial opposing a bill passed by the assembly that would fund a political awareness event sponsored by the group Students For Garrett Clark. The bill was eventually vetoed by Reimherr, but his vice president, Hayes, failed to voice any concern in the assembly, which he chairs. Another possible conflict of interest arises with Hayes’ membership in Pi Kappa Alpha, the same fraternity to which Clark belonged.
Last year, ASUU delivered successful initiatives like the Graduation Guarantee and textbook sales tax exemption in accordance with student interests. As we near the end of Fall Semester, we wonder what the legacy of this administration will be. Winning an election is a vote of trust, not a mandate to pursue just anything.
During the remainder of the school year, Reimherr and ASUU should rethink their leadership methods and build some consensus. Instead of wasting time, energy and money inventing ideas indiscriminately, or at least haphazardly, ASUU should put more research into legitimate student needs.