Two students have the privilege of representing the other 20,000 of us on the board that makes the university’s most important decisions.
In the opinion of the state and the university, however, those students are not supposed to represent our point of view.
Board of Trustees Secretary Peter Mather said that because the student trustees are appointed by the governor, “they have a larger role than just being representatives or advocates for students in particular.”
If student trustees are not supposed to represent us, though, why are they even called “student trustees?”
Newly appointed student trustee Keith Wilbur said it best: “To separate the two (words) is just illogical.”
But it’s more than illogical to expect student trustees to check their perspective at the door — it’s deceptive. Look at the 13 members of the Board of Trustees and decide which you think are supposed to represent students. The obvious answer is the student trustees. The correct answer is none of them.
Additionally, because the student trustees are not allowed to vote, their best opportunities to influence trustee decisions are in closed-door meetings. That pushes whatever sway student trustees might have out of the public view, obfuscating the way decisions are made.
A public university should be making every effort to be transparent, but OU President Roderick McDavis said it’s easier to get things done behind closed doors. “When you’re in the privacy of an office … you’re freer to say things,” he said.
It’s an argument we’ve heard before from the university — the very same reason Budget Planning Council meetings are closed to the public.
The university’s soon-to-be senior student trustee, Amanda Roden, claims that trustees are already effective and that they are not on the board to advocate for students. In fact, Roden says it’s Student Senate’s job to represent students to the board.
In that case, there is no reason for the student trustee position to even exist.
As McDavis said, “It’s all about influence.”
And we have none.
Editorials represent the majority opinion of The Post’s executive editors.
