Richard BaganEach year, The Gateway publishes an evaluation of the Students’ Union Executive and the Board of Governors representative. It’s impossible to discuss every aspect of their tenures, so these reports are largely based on the major components of the platform each executive campaigned on, and the most significant responsibilities of their respective positions. These evaluations were informed by interviews with the executives themselves. The grading rubric can be found below. And if you’re short for time, check out our TLDR for a bite-sized breakdown.
Joel Agarwal: C
The role of the vice-president (academic) is to improve the academic experience of the students here at the University of Alberta. This is mainly done by sitting on a ton of committees, advocating to the institution about matters of academic importance, and attending meetings. Joel Agarwal has done a mediocre job at this at best, and most of his efforts for improvement will have to be taken up and continued by his successor in order to come to fruition.
Last year, Agarwal ran for this position uncontested, which meant that it was him or no one. Still, his platform made him seem competent enough, so I had no qualms with him; but he didn’t deliver.
It is the responsibility of the vice-president (academic) to pioneer innovative, money-saving solutions for students who may not be able to afford the traditional university experience. Though Agarwal explicitly mentioned textbook prices on the campaign trail, not much progress has been made this year. He hosted the BeSmart Book Fair, but that was just a continuation of the work of vice-presidents past. Agarwal says that just 500 students attended the event, which, even if we only count the undergrads on campus, is just around 1.5 per cent of all students. He also wrote an article on Open Educational Resources (OERs) for The Flame, which is the Students’ Union’s News portal, but when is the last time you went there for breaking news or resources? Their last article was posted in early November. There’s no way for us to know how successful his podcast on OERs was, but suffice to say, his work in this area has been lacklustre this year.
Agarwal also hosted a new event this year called Brainpop, the intention of which is to get students more involved in research. Though attendance was low, the vice-president claims there was a high international student turnout, which he counts as a win.
Another huge part of the vice-president (academic) portfolio is getting students involved in student governance. This year, Agarwal chose to re-brand GovWeek as Student Leaders Week, to a certain degree of failure. Only 170 students attended the event across the whole week, according to Agarwal, and when questioned about the relative degree of success or failure around this number, he said “the students that come to these events are often students that run for student governance, faculty associations, and executive positions, and to me that’s worth it.”
This is a strange response, because one could argue that many of these students are already involved in student governance. In essence, attendees are likely to go into campus politics not because they’ve been drawn to it by Student Leaders Week, but because they would have anyway. This event, in spite of the re-branding, has been largely unsuccessful in bringing new faces to the table.
The work between the vice-president (academic) and STRIDE this year was equally disappointing. Something that has long been a part of the vice-president’s portfolio, STRIDE is a group aimed primarily at helping women and non-binary individuals feel comfortable getting involved in government. But even Agarwal admits it has faced a decrease in attendance this year. Given that last year there were only two female candidates for the SU, and that only one of them made it on to the executive team, STRIDE should have been pushed much harder this year. STRIDE lead a few sessions during the abysmally attended Student Leaders Week, and its programming was included in the Council of Faculty Associations (COFA). These are not exactly what I would call “strides” for equality in student governance.
When asked about including more Indigenous content in courses this year, which was a huge platform point, Agarwal simply responded that it was “an ongoing file.” He mentioned that this year a Vice-Provost Indigenous Representative was hired, which is a step in the right direction, and pointed towards the wins they’d had in removing the Indigenous quotas from medicine and dentistry, as well as rolling out the land acknowledgements in pharmacy. However, like many of his other moves this year, much of his advocacy around this subject was limited to “conversations” and “moving in a positive direction” rather than tangible results.
TLDR: The stagnancy of the vice-president (academic) this year has been discouraging. Certain moves were made, but conversations can only take us so far. When we ask ourselves “what has VP Agarwal done this year which was controversial or groundbreaking?” we find ourselves without an answer. Most of his accomplishments can be attributed, at least in part, to vice-president (academic) leaders of the past, and those which were solely his doing had questionable success. Though Agarwal carried out his duties on a basic level, he was not outstandingly successful in a great deal of his advocacy, leaving much to be done by the next vice-president (academic).
A-range: This person has fulfilled the promises they campaigned on and more, has created tangible change during their tenure, and has shown a commitment to improving the lives of students. Their GPA is top tier.
B-range: This person has done their job consistently well, but has not made any remarkable changes, or has fallen short on important goals they set out in their platforms. They’re doing fine, but it’s nothing to phone home about.
C-range: This person has done their job sufficiently, but has failed to make significant progress in the areas most relevant to their portfolio, or has essentially abandoned a major part of their platform. They’re still passing with a safe buffer though, and Cs get degrees!
D-range: This person has done a very lacklustre job, and has not sufficiently fulfilled their campaign promises or the responsibilities of their position.
F-range: This person has not done their job, has not represented students, and has not fulfilled their campaign promises whatsoever.
CORRECTION: A previous version of this article stated that 500 students make up 0.05 per cent of the undergraduate population at the U of A. This was an error. 500 students actually makes up 1.5 per cent of the undergraduate population. The article has been updated to reflect this.
