The three finalists for the undergraduate Young Trustee position participated in the first-ever Young Trustee public debate Tuesday night.
Seniors Chelsea Goldstein, John Harpham and Zach Perret spent an hour discussing their backgrounds, the Young Trustee position and imminent concerns facing the University in front of a crowd of about 50 students in the Great Hall. The debate was held by the Young Trustee Nominating Committee and moderated by YTNC Chair Lauren Moxley, a sophomore.
All three finalists noted their desire to stay in close contact with the Duke community after graduating to better serve as Young Trustee.
“I think the major challenge a Young Trustee faces is not how much you know about student life, but how much you don’t know about the rest of Duke,” Harpham said. “I would get acquainted with things at Duke that I haven’t had direct experience with as a student.”
The three candidates took turns answering 10 questions during the debate, divided into two segments. The first segment asked questions focusing on the candidates’ qualifications for the Young Trustee position, and the second half examined their stances on major University issues.
The candidates also emphasized their leadership roles at Duke—Goldstein as Duke Student Government’s 2008-2009 vice-president for academic affairs, Perret as Duke University Union’s current president and Harpham as the 2008-2009 chair of The Chronicle’s independent Editorial Board—and using the experience and knowledge they have gained to help them as Young Trustee.
Many of the questions during the second segment focused on Duke’s priorities in light of the current recession.
Continuing construction of Duke University Health System’s new cancer center and other hospital buildings and improving Central Campus were two points that all three candidates said Duke needed to emphasize despite economic constraints.
“If, as rumors have it, Central Campus—or New Campus—is 10 years away, it’s not acceptable to have Central Campus be in the capacity that it currently is. I’ve lived there—it was not great,” Perret said.
The issue of minority representation was also discussed. Harpham and Perret both addressed the low number of minority faculty at Duke. The two also agreed on the need for a more diverse social scene, especially in Greek life and selective living groups.
Goldstein said socioeconomic disparity is a larger problem than the racial divide at Duke. She suggested using more resources to help students from low-income families academically and socially so they can integrate better into Duke life.
“You see friend groups forming around socioeconomic norms, and I think that’s one of the bad things about Duke,” Goldstein said. “I think we can take out some of these extra costs, center social life more on campus and have it be more inclusive for everyone.”
Two questions asked in the debate came from students. Moxley said she sent out a blast e-mail Feb. 1 to the student body soliciting questions to ask during the debate, and received those two questions.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.