Last week, in a strange homage to the Reformation, Wesley Vaughn nailed his “22 Theses” to the already cluttered walls of the opinions page. In it, he essentially criticized the UA administration by presenting them as beholden to outside influences, disconnected from the student body and unconcerned about its interests.

While the University has many issues to fix and has ignored many opportunities to do so, it is difficult to believe Vaughn’s implicit assertion that the administration is entirely unreceptive to the student body, especially in regards to its vision for campus growth.

Regardless, the fact that this accusation is prevalent far beyond The Crimson White indicates that the administration might have a problem communicating to the student body about this vision and the sweeping changes accompanying it. Ironically enough, their overreliance on safe public relations statements has created its own set of problems.

For starters, they seem to ignore the fact that high school seniors care about a completely different set of issues than currently enrolled students. As such, the marketing points that have been so effective in appealing to and recruiting new students, such as the rise in average GPA and ACT scores, the number of new buildings on campus, and the records that have been set with prestige scholarship recipients, completely miss the mark when they are used to sell campus vision to enrolled students.

The long-term benefits of increasing University prestige, which translates into a higher value for UA diplomas, and interested applicants, who increase competitiveness, are applicable to all students. The simple fact remains, though, that when a new face comes to campus, he or she is faced with a lack of parking spaces within a mile of classes, an excessively long line at the Ferguson Center, a shortage of on-campus housing space for upperclassmen and a host of other problems.

The administration can tout its National Merit Scholar recruitment to enrolled students all they want; however, they are marketing it to the wrong crowd in the face of these tangible problems. In fact, doing so only creates the unfortunate perception in the minds of some students that the administration neither understands nor cares about their daily problems.

To clarify, I find this pessimistic view to be simply false. For the most part, my experience at UA has been nothing short of wonderful and I am proud to be a part of the Crimson Tide. Additionally, my limited interactions with UA administrators have led me to believe that they genuinely care about student issues.

Nevertheless, the perception exists and it will persist if the University continues to fear saying anything unpopular.

The University needs to directly reach out to students and honestly explain their vision to them in a way that actually connects. The safe PR statements currently issued create more controversy than they avoid. While I cannot speak for all students, it might be beneficial to look beyond UA’s record number of USA Today Academic All-Americans and answer a few more pertinent questions:

Is parking acceptable in its current state as a systematic problem doomed to persist or a temporary product of growing pains that will be fixed with the development of the Bryce property? Will housing become more limited with the continued demolition of residence halls or experience a net gain because of new housing? How will the campus vision, especially in regards to the rapid student body growth, affect our collegiate experience?

Even though these questions appear to be shortsighted and may have disappointing answers, simply providing a direct and honest response to them can be a key to opening up a dialogue that concerned students can appreciate. We can never hope to progress if we are limited to a back and forth between people that do not understand each other’s reasoning.

As the coverage of greek integration and Student Organization Seating demonstrate, issues that place the administration in difficult positions will persist on this campus; however, the University should not subject itself to new points of disagreement simply because of a lack of genuine communication.

John Brinkerhoff is a sophomore majoring in Political Science and Communication Studies. His column runs biweekly on Mondays.