Ab SchStudents’ Union President William Lau has a nice smile. I can see why students voted for him.
He’s also patient and reassuring. At the Students’ Council meeting on Oct. 21 (which was not as boring as it sounds), he frankly explained to me the situation of the Peter Lougheed Leadership College despite my half-crazed histrionics. It turns out the provincial government endowed $35 million to the Peter Lougheed Leadership Initiative that neither the university nor council can touch, although it’s unclear how much of that will actually go toward the facilities and programming on the U of A campus. The new college is also going to be paid for by donations. Exact numbers have been difficult to find, if they exist at all.
But there’s something rotten here. When the Leadership College was announced last year amid post-secondary education funding cuts from the provincial government, students were justifiably outraged. For 144 students, or approximately 0.36 per cent of the student population, a brand-new college with a residence was to be built so they can learn “leadership.”
What exactly will be happening in the new college has been remarkably vague. The website says the college will teach students to “use critical thinking skills based on sound evidence” and “understand diverse perspectives,” which is exactly what you do to get a Bachelor of Arts. What’s more, founding principal of the college, Kim Campbell, has proposed the absurd: to teach leadership in brand new facilities through online courses. In short, they’ve done a terrible job of promoting their college.
Some SU members last year, such as former VP (Academic) Dustin Chelen, were skeptical about the entire project. But this year, Lau sent an email to students on Nov. 28, saying he wants student focus groups “that will discuss student perception of the Leadership College as well as what would make it appealing to you.” As a bribe, he’s offering free lunch and $30 (which is enough to download Idina Menzel’s new Christmas album three times from iTunes).
If the new Leadership College were to be paid entirely by grants from the wealthy, I wouldn’t care at all. But the government seems to be paying a large percentage. To answer Lau’s first question, it looks like the PCs are funnelling taxpayers’ money into this project so a few smart students can earn some extra credentials, while saying “fuck you” to the overwhelming majority of students by buying out their professors (121 in 2013, to be exact) and raising student tuition (the PCs’ tuition freeze ends after the 2013–14 academic year, brace yourselves).
To make the college more appealing, I’d like it to not exist at all because I’m not convinced of its worth. If it is built, god forbid, I’d like clarity rather than obfuscation regarding the funding and programming.
I’ll only attack Students’ Council if it’s warranted, because while they have extremely limited power when talking to government, students do need to be represented. But this is warranted. An email like this from Lau makes council look like lackeys that fight for students when it’s convenient, then simply take orders from the university to carry out PR relations when students have simmered a bit.
I was surprised at the number of student councillors interested in attending the new college. Instead of gauging perception of the Leadership College, they should check student perception of Student Council. With a move like this, councillors really don’t seem to be representing their fellow students’ interests. They’re really making it look like they’re in it for themselves.
