Table of Contents
Dear Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University,
On Saturday evening, Stanford undergraduates received an email from the Associated Students of Stanford University (ASSU) Nominations Commission, announcing the opening of applications to serve on committees of the Board of Trustees. The Nominations Commission makes clear that applicants must demonstrate an ideological commitment to the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion. As an undergraduate, I wish to express my concern that the Nominations Commission’s continued use of the diversity statement in applications to serve on Board of Trustees committees is not in the university’s best interest.
The application circulated by the Nominations Commission requests that students answer three questions:
- What specific committee(s) are you interested in?
- Why are you interested in the committee(s) that you have chosen and how do you plan to contribute to the committee(s)?
- How would you advocate for diversity and inclusion within your committee(s)?
The Commission further notes that “we are interested in applicants that demonstrate a history of serving their wider community, are guided by the principles of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and can balance their convictions with those of the student body.” Clearly, Commission members see advocating for DEI as the primary responsibility of student representatives on university committees.
Meanwhile, the committees themselves have nothing to do with DEI. Committees with an open position include Academic and Student Affairs, Engagement and Advancement of the Institution, Finance, and Land & Buildings (the full list of university committees can be viewed here). The Nominations Commission also sent out a separate application for an open position on the Board on Conduct Affairs, with considerable responsibilities over the student conduct system. Thus, the Commission forces students to affirm their commitment to an ideological framework that has nothing to do with the committees on which they hope to serve.
The Nominations Commission also engages in affirmative action. According to its website, the Commission “strives to amplify the diverse perspectives and experiences within the student body, and it is committed to ensuring that inclusive and equitable representation is implemented across the institution.” This language suggests that factors beyond qualifications specifically relevant to effective service on these committees also affect selection. Significantly, the Commission’s stated preference for applicants who are “guided by the principles of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” is in conflict with its mission of ensuring “inclusive and equitable representation,” since students with moderate or conservative political views are disadvantaged, and given the required diversity statement, might not even apply.
One might object that the Nominations Commission, which is “comprised of . . . members nominated by the ASSU President and confirmed by the legislative bodies,” is a democratic institution, and therefore the required diversity statement reflects a majority belief among undergraduates in the principal importance of DEI. Even so, the current system of appointing students to university committees results in a tyranny of the majority: applicants are evaluated based on their expressed allegiance to a narrow set of political views held by ASSU members, but certainly not by all Stanford students. If the Commission believes appointees should “balance their convictions with those of the student body,” why don’t they judge applicants accordingly? Instead of a diversity statement, the Commission should ask applicants why they believe they’re qualified to represent the wide range of views held by Stanford students. After all, their constituency is the entire student body—not the ASSU.
Committees of the Board of Trustees are influential instruments of university management, and student appointees are crucial points of contact between the administration and the student body. Under the auspices of the ASSU, these positions are dominated by applicants who adequately express their commitment to DEI, rather than those who, no matter their political leanings, are most qualified and eager to represent the student body as a whole. Thanks to the ASSU Nominations Commission’s political litmus test, you can rest assured that you will be working with students committed to upholding the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Whether they are interested in working hard to serve the entire Stanford community is another question entirely.
Sincerely,
Ben Botvinick
