Following the completion of the recent young trustee election, many of those involved in the selection process have raised questions as to whether it is the most sound way to select a student leader to serve on the University's governing body.
Primary among the concerns that those involved in this year's and past elections have discussed are issues of bias-both within the Executive Committee of the Inter-Community Council and the Duke Student Government legislature-and of confidentiality. As evidence of the seriousness of the debate surrounding the selection process, several members of DSG and ICC have collaborated to propose a substantial by-law amendment that they will present to the DSG legislature at its general body meeting March 3 (see related story, page 1).
Criticism of the young trustee process extends back several years, including a 1994 student petition requesting that the DSG legislature be removed from the selection process entirely that was presented to the Student Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees.
According to current by-laws, the executive committee of the ICC, chaired by the DSG vice president for community interaction, conducts the young trustee application and interview process. Traditionally, about 20 students apply for the position, and seven to 10 may be selected by the executive committee to be interviewed.
Upon interviewing those candidates, the executive committee's 12 voting members, who are leaders of various student organizations, elect three finalists for the position. Those three finalists then appear before the DSG legislature, which, along with the members of the ICC executive committee, votes to choose one of the three candidates to serve as young trustee.
The young trustee is subject to final approval by the Board of Trustees and, once approved, serves for a three year term on the board, the first of which is as a non-voting member.
Trinity senior Takcus Nesbit, president of DSG and young trustee elect, said that in contrast to years past, confidentiality was not a significant issue this year, and added that a greater concern with the process is the potential for bias at the DSG level. He said that he has heard the argument, for example, that the DSG president has an inherent advantage if he or she is a finalist in the process because of his or her close and consistent contact with legislators.
Before Nesbit, however, DSG had not chosen the student body president as young trustee since 1985. "It can be easily argued that the DSG president has a disadvantage," Nesbit said. "What if, for example, the president had vetoed two of the bills the legislature had pushed for that year?" Such circumstances, he said, might sway members of the legislature against the DSG president.
Trinity junior Trang Nguyen, vice president for community interaction and chair of the ICC, said she agreed that the legislators may have a better grasp of the strengths and weaknesses of the DSG president than of the other candidates. She added that while the majority of the legislators make a concerted effort to read the packet of information on each candidate and inform themselves during the process, it is likely that there is a positive or negative relationship that they have developed with the president that may still influence the process.
Both Nesbit and Nguyen said, however, that if the process remains unchanged, the only way to combat the potential for such bias is to impress upon the legislature the importance of the process and the need for members to separate themselves from personal biases and evaluate each candidate on his or her qualifications for the position.
Many legislators who were involved in the process this year said, in fact, that they felt they had at least a greater level of interaction with Nesbit than either of the other two finalists-Trinity senior Husein Cumber and Trinity senior Brian Daniels.
"I definitely have had more interpersonal contact with [Nesbit]," said Trinity sophomore Al Gilberti, a West Campus legislator, "but legislators should have done their best to overlook any bias they may have had for or against [Nesbit]-I know I did."
Gilberti added that the knowledge that legislators have of the DSG president largely focuses on that person's accomplishments as president, which are not necessarily equal to the qualifications that must be considered in looking for the best young trustee.
Daniels said that while he felt the overall selection process was solid, he did feel that members of the legislature could have been better informed about all of the candidates. "It is difficult to speak to the group when they don't know your background," he said. Daniels added that when he first went to talk with the various DSG subcommittees, it appeared as though members were just receiving each of the candidates applications.
Despite his concerns with the process, Daniels said that the DSG legislature should remain an integral part of the process as an organization representative of the student body. "It is the responsibility of the legislators to get to know all of the candidates as well as possible," he said. "DSG legislators should be mature enough to understand the role of the young trustee and therefore should be involved in that decision."
While the question of bias at the DSG level may appear to be an obvious issue when the president is a finalist, the ICC executive committee is also made up of student leaders who have significant connections to other prominent students on campus.
Because the University is small, most people involved in leadership positions are going to have a great deal of contact with other student leaders. In such a situation, it is possible that members of the ICC executive committee will know more about one candidate than another through campus activities.
Nguyen said she agreed that a high level of familiarity between a candidate and a member of the committee is possible, but added that the diverse nature of the committee's members effectively produces a system of checks and balances.
In discussing the makeup of the executive committee, Nguyen also addressed concerns raised by critics of the process that there is no accountability for the selection of the finalists if the process remains confidential. She explained that such a diverse group of student leaders helps to maintain the integrity of the process.
"We have to trust in the fact that, because we have a broad-based group of student leaders, they will handle the process diligently and professionally," Nguyen said. She added that opening the entire process to the public would be detrimental to the candidates and to the process itself.
"I don't think that the ICC should have to deal with any outside pressures," Nguyen said. The process, she added, already becomes very politicized when the three finalists are announced. Nguyen explained that by opening the process, members of the community could openly lobby for any of the candidates and effectively turn the process into more of a campaign. "[Young trustee] is a position that is too important to the University and students to be made more political," she said.
Young trustee Sarah Dodds, Trinity '95, who served on ICC her junior year and applied to be young trustee her senior year, said she agreed with Nguyen that the process should remain confidential. "This position is not to serve as a representative position for the student body," Dodds said. "Each candidate is being judged on a personal level-it is a much more personal endeavor than an election process."
In defending the integrity of the ICC's role in the process, Dodds said that the selection process is actually protective of all of the candidates. "It is a small enough group so that there can be a good discussion and members are not subject to popularity contests or the will of the general body," Dodds said. "Everyone goes in there with some degree of bias, but people who are diehard for one candidate die out quickly."
While such discussion about the young trustee selection process has continued for many years, the authors of the proposed legislation that will come before the DSG legislature this week hope to bring some concrete resolution to the debate.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.