Criticism is common at the Capstone, especially when it is directed at the UA administration. A visitor would not have to go far to find a student willing to speak out on perceived issues with parking, drug enforcement or tuition rates.
This is particularly true on this page, which often functions as the focal point for debates on campus issues. This semester has seen a battery of concerns leveled against the administration, ranging from its hyper-focus on recruitment to Bonner’s similarities with a “Harry Potter” villain.
This criticism is healthy, for the most part. It empowers the student body and sheds light on problems facing campus. It educates students on citizenship and promotes engagement within the UA community.
However, criticism risks being counterproductive and damaging if it is not presented within the greater context of University change. Just as issues with this University deserve to be discussed, the progress that Alabama has made should also be highlighted.
I will be the first to say that looping around my parking zone for 30 minutes to find a spot and having to take a series of completely unnecessary one-way roads to do so is unacceptable; however, that reality has not destroyed my collegiate experience. On the whole, I love this University and all that it has given me.
Too often, it is easy to be entirely consumed by what we want to change without recognizing why we are proud to be students at this University. Unfortunately, when placed in the context of the student perspective on the direction of campus, this limited view inhibits a healthy debate and invites a one-sided perspective on the direction of this University.
Take the Opinions page as an example. In the past, this page has proven itself to be an incredible facilitator of discussion, but only when the content placed in it can reflect a true diversity of opinion. One columnist’s appraisal of the University’s view towards tradition and race drew sharp criticism from the greek community, and led to an actual in-person conversation between two very different people.
Beyond conversations, appreciating the progress that this University has made is a proven avenue for converting criticism into actual change. Whether it was eliminating a proposal to have metered parking on campus or establishing Creative Campus, change on this campus has largely been enacted in partnership with faculty and administrative groups, with the mutual understanding that both sides care about the Capstone and have its best interests at heart.
Anything less than an actual desire to discuss issues reduces the power of the student body into an ineffective megaphone that lambasts decision makers as opponents, severs talented students with big ideas from administrators that can assist and, most importantly, is apt to be ignored.
This is not to say that criticism should be blunted or that student concerns should remain unstated. Students should hold the administration accountable for its actions; however, it should be done while recognizing the dedication to students required of their position. It should be done in search of common ground and without assuming evil intentions behind a disagreeable decision. It should be done with respect.
If students concerned about the direction of the Capstone truly want to see change, realities on campus demand that they examine which avenue can best produce it. Criticism is healthy, but it must have a purpose. Without this purpose, criticism is nothing more than hollow complaining.
John Brinkerhoff is the opinion editor of The Crimson White. His column runs weekly. Follow John on Twitter @JohnBrinkerhoff.
Leading in today’s Crimson White:
Author previews graphic novel about 1960s Marion
