Dear Natasha, thank you so much for accepting this exclusive interview with The CEU Weekly. Natasha, in spite of the importance and centrality that Hungarian Law gives to student unions in the student life of Universities, the SU in CEU has at times seem to be a weak institution, lacking organic structure, continuity and, most important, students’ participation.
TCW: After serving as the president for a year, could you share with us, which were the biggest challenges you encountered and how did you manage to overcome them?
Natasha: Yes, the Hungarian law does give student unions some significant say in University policies, yet the nature of CEU makes it difficult for the SU to function to its full potential. The biggest obstacle we faced is that many students are only at CEU for one or two years, which makes knowledge transfer very problematic. For example, when I became the President I had been at CEU for less than a month, I did not know how the University functioned and there were very few people around me who could advise me. I spent the last year figuring all this out and I still don’t know everything. Another obstacle was that very little, in terms of procedures or structures, was available in writing. So throughout the year, the Board had to create procedures for most of what we did. Thanks to the help of Student Services, I spent this summer writing two SU handbooks. I hope these will help explain, among others, the different tasks of SU members, the structure of the SU, who to contact for different issues, and the internal procedures for dealing with policy papers, position papers, the annual events, club/group registration, and funding student projects. Now, the task of the new Assembly and Board will be to figure out a way to properly communicate to students what the SU is, how it is structured, how the SU can help students, and how students can get involved.
TCW: To be fair, it must also be said that the outgoing administration of the SU also had relevant achievements. For example, not only the organization of a legendary spring ball (as The Weekly reported on the 4th issue) but also durable legacies as the new SU constitution. Could you tell us and expand a little bit on the achievements that you are most proud of?
Natasha: Well, I am proud of the Spring Ball, especially the posters and tickets that were designed because it was entirely a CEU community project. The photographer was a Business School student, the models were students and alumni, and the designer of the posters and ticket works in the Alumni Relations & Career Services office. It was also great to queer up the Spring Ball (many of us went in drag or with our same-sex partners)!
I am also very proud that the SU was so active this year and involved in so many different areas of the University. For example, we helped raise funds for a student with cancer, we supported the Sustainable Campus Initiative (SCI), the SU Doctoral Committee was able to get a part of an SU policy paper included in the CEU Doctoral Regulations, the annual events were successful, and we funded numerous student initiatives.
But what I am most proud of is what I am working on now. My last act as the President is to propose amendments to the SU Constitution that will allow the Roma Access Program (RAP) to participate in CEU’s student government. The RAP is a nine-month preparatory non-degree course for young Roma scholars from Central and Eastern Europe. The participants are not technically CEU students, so they are not members of the SU and thus they cannot be involved in the student government. Although the RAP participants are not formally students I believe that functionally they are. They spend nine months on-campus involved in rigorous preparatory academic work. During their time at CEU, RAP participants are allowed to be involved in student life and clubs on-campus. Their student life is affected by the decisions of the SU and therefore they should have representation in the SU. Moreover, I believe that participation in student government helps all involved to improve their leadership skills. This can be a great way to set oneself apart when applying for placement in an academic program and this opportunity should not be denied the RAP participants. Therefore I am initiating amendments to the Constitution. However, it will be up to the new Assembly to debate and decide on this issue.
TCW: Thanks Natasha. And, for those new students interested in serving as part of the SU, what would be your advice? What would you tell to the next SU board and constituencies?
Natasha: For the Board, I would advise students not to run for it if they are not going to take the SU seriously. The SU has the potential to impact the CEU community in positive ways, yet it hinders this potential when a number of Board members slack on their responsibilities. Also, the Board has been restructured this year in hopes to improve communication and to ease the amount of work placed on Board members (after all, we are students first!). It is extremely important to communicate to the student body what the SU does, its structure (which I admit is very confusing), how the SU can help students, and how students can get involved and be part of the community—even if they are not Assembly members.
To the constituents: be involved! Talk to your Assembly members. Ask them what issues the SU is dealing with and voice your opinion. Encourage your representatives to bring issues to the attention of the Board and the Assembly. Or tell the Board members that you want to help at an event; even one or two hours are greatly appreciated!
TCW: Also in this context, were there any CEU units that you could work easier and that you would advice SU to continue doing it? Which were the natural allies? And, did you face particular difficulties on some specific area?
Natasha: The two offices we had the most contact with were the Student Life Office (SLO) and the Alumni Relations & Career Services office (ARCS). Janka and Zsolt from the SLO do most of the leg work for the SU when it comes to events. Peter Johnson, the VP of Student Services, has also been very open to the SU this year. Additionally, I hope the SU continues to work with ARCS. For example, I think connecting ARCS career events, like Simply Networking, with the SU ChocoChats would be a great way to work together.
I did face a few difficulties with one or two members of CEU’s upper administration that were, on occasion, less than professional and gave me the impression that they do not value the input of the SU. But most of the difficulties I had this year was with the structure of CEU and knowing whom to contact on certain issues. Also, from my experience, there is a lack of internal communication between most administrative units, academic departments, and students. I also admit that this is a problem the SU has as well. It would be great if the SU could work with Sybil Wyatt, the new Director of Communications, to share best practices and help improve communication throughout the whole University.
TCW: Thanks a lot for your time Natasha, congratulations for the successful SU presidency! Is there something you would like to add? Some message you would like to share with these very enthusiastic new students?
Natasha: As the new SU slogan goes, ‘Your Voice Matters’! Really, the SU is only as good as the students want to make it. I have talked with many of the new students and they seem very enthused; I hope this continues throughout the year!
I would also like to thank those who were active last year and made the SU as involved and successful as it was. This includes Laura and Courtney from the Board, Ana-Partricia and Miklos from the Constitution Committee, all of those involved in the Spring Ball photo shoot and planning the annual events, Janka and Zsolt from the SLO, Bobby from ARCS, and those Assembly members who constantly showed up and participated in the debates!
0 comments:
Post a Comment