In their racial and gender makeup and campus affiliation, this year’s Young Trustee semi-finalists are similar.
Four of the eight semi-finalists have a current affiliation with Duke Student Government and the majority of the candidates are white men.
Sophomore Christine Larson, chair of the Young Trustee Nominating Committee, said DSG experience tends to make for a “more qualified” candidate. Last year, three of the seven semi-finalists for YT was affiliated with DSG.
“Generally people who have experience with DSG know a lot about issues on campus and are familiar with the interactions between the Board [of Trustees], the University and students,” Larson said. “It doesn’t mean that if you’re not in DSG, you’re not qualified. But that extra little bit may help.”
DSG Executive Vice President Pete Schork, a junior, said it makes sense that students affiliated with DSG would be attracted to the YT position.
“I think that the kind of people involved in DSG would also be comfortable with working in a Board of Trustee environment,” Schork said. “The people interested in benefitting the life of the University [through being YT] would also want to run for DSG.”
Still, notably missing from this year’s semi-finalists were the leaders of major campus groups. DSG President Mike Lefevre, a senior, promised when campaigning for president that he would not run for Young Trustee. Duke University Union President Yi Zhang and Campus Council President Stephen Temple, both seniors, also chose not to apply.
“It’s not anything against the position,” Zhang said. “For me personally, if I don’t really want [the position], I won’t do a good job.”
Additionally, six of the semi-finalists are male, leaving only two female candidates—even though nine of the 20 original applicants were female. Larson said the disproportionate number of men was not due to bias, but that the male candidates happened to be generally more qualified. Three of last year’s seven semi-finalists were female.
Larson, however, admitted that this year’s semi-finalist selection process and its results will likely lead to debate.
“We knew the identity of the candidates going into it, and I’m not sure that’s good because it leads to questions about gender,” Larson said. “We chose the applications based on qualifications.”
Last year, DSG blacked out any information that could reveal the candidates’ identities. Following a bylaw change, all identifying information was available to the YTNC.
Junior Lauren Moxley, last year’s YTNC chair, said the transition to transparency about applicants’ identities created a better process. She added that in past years, some members of the YTNC knew the identities of certain candidates, which led to a “weird dynamic.” Moxley also said blacking out information was not always successful in keeping identities anonymous.
“For example, the applications would say ‘The president of blank, the largest women’s group on campus,” she said. “You would know that it’s [the Panhellenic Association].”
Schork also noted that specific information about campus involvement is important for determining whether a student is qualified to be the Young Trustee and what kind of impact he or she might have.
Although the racial background of the original applicants is unclear, only two of the semi-finalists are non-white.
Candidates also exhibited similar ideas. Almost every candidate identified Duke’s global expansion and the University’s struggle with public image as key issues, yet did not propose any new ideas on how to change this perception.
Interviews for each of the eight semi-finalists will be held Friday and three finalists will be announced Jan. 29. Students will elect the Young Trustee Feb. 15.
This article has been corrected to reflect the fact that three of last year's semi-finalists were involved with DSG. The Chronicle regrets the error.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.