The honeymoon period is over. The wave of optimism, excitement and admiration brought by his historic accession to the presidency has faded, overshadowed by financial troubles and controversial policies under his administration. Some of those who had held him to great esteem have become disenchanted, unsure whether or not he could deliver the change they were once so sure he could bring.
Such is the current state of affairs of two men people around here call president, one of whom lives on stately Pennsylvania Ave and the other on the slightly less stately Webster Ave. When College President Jim Yong Kim first came to Dartmouth, many hailed him as our very own Barack Obama a characterization that Kim seems to have been faithful to, for better or for worse. After two years in office, Obama has evidently lost some of the unwavering supporters that elected him. The President's detractors claim it's because he has lost touch with the American people and has stopped listening to their interests. Closer to campus, Kim is veering in the same unfortunate direction.
Initially, I felt that Kim was somewhat of a populist, someone who sought to relate to students and who cared about what we have to say. He pledged to keep students involved during the decision-making process, that the administration valued student input on important policy decisions. But time and time again, Kim has betrayed this promise.
This summer, the College abruptly announced via an e-mail that it would be closing off the swimming docks on the Connecticut River. And just like that, a long cherished Dartmouth tradition was effectively banned without a single student being consulted beforehand. At the very least, a little heads-up would have been nice. Sure, not being able to officially swim in the river may seem like a petty issue that'll come to pass, but Kim hasn't done much better when it comes to keeping us involved with his long term goals for the College. Take the new Dartmouth Center for Health Care Delivery Science, a costly and far-reaching project that will no doubt significantly affect the direction that this school takes in the coming years. Naturally, students have yet to get a chance to express our thoughts about it to the administration.
Of course, there have been times when the College has asked for student opinions, like the formation of SPARHC to deal with alcohol-related problems on campus. But when SPARHC released its findings last May, the administration seemed quite eager to forget about it. It's been four months and Kim still hasn't made clear why none of the student recommendations were enacted. And now, there's the controversy surrounding replacement of Blitz ("College stands behind e-mail pick," Oct. 1). Students were included in the study group that searched for an alternate e-mail provider, but again, their recommendations were promptly ignored for no good reason.
Granted, the administration probably thought long and hard before implementing its policies the way they did, and believed they had the best interest of students in mind. Perhaps Kim thought that students would do nothing but vehemently protest decisions like closing off the river for swimming, and thus would have nothing meaningful to contribute if brought to the table. Or perhaps he thought that his decisions were so carefully thought out that there couldn't have been any better way to implement them. But this still doesn't excuse the lack of transparency and disregard for student opinions. Even if we oppose a policy that the College is adamant on carrying out, we should be able to voice our concerns and suggestions beforehand.
Instead of surprising us with decision after decision, Kim needs to give us the opportunity to voice our thoughts about important policies before they are thrown at us. And when we do give our opinions, the administration shouldn't rush to brush them aside. Who knows, maybe one of the 4,000 students here might even raise an important point that the administration, in all its wisdom, didn't think about. After all, students are the ones who have swam in the river, who use Blitz most frequently and who have been exposed to alcohol related issues first hand. Perhaps we can add an important perspective to these issues that the folks in Parkhurst haven't considered.
