Students should have a seat on the Board of Trustees
It’s no secret that while USC has continued to grow, it has had an increasingly insular institutional culture grow with it as well in recent years. President Carol Folt’s appointment in the Fall speaks volumes in changing this, but one person can only do so much, especially in the face of the Board of Trustees.
Last semester, the Board adopted sweeping changes that Chair Rick Caruso described in an article in the Los Angeles Times as “really big and meaningful.” Since taking charge of the Board in 2018, Caruso had pledged to shift the Board to a culture of “open-mindedness, being inclusive and being open to learning.”
Last semester’s changes, which includes term limits and a 40% decrease of the number of seats, seemed like a step — albeit a small one — in the right direction, especially in what has been seen as stasis and difficulty in oversight by the Board. However, it is evident that Caruso’s reforms are not institutional in nature, especially as what matters most is the content of the work carried out by the Board, not its structure.
If Caruso does want the Board to be “more engaged, more authentic, … and really be more connected to the campus,” then much more needs to be done. Students and faculty should be given seats on the governing board and committees to bridge an institutional disconnect. Giving students, faculty and staff — true University stakeholders — power to observe and vote would allow for longstanding concerns to advance more quickly to the Board.
The Board of Trustees must be transparent so that student concerns are directly amplified to those in control of USC. Student representation must be a key part of the University’s decision-making, especially with what seems to be a diverging moral and ethical priority between administration and students.
Last week, more than 100 students rallied at Tommy Trojan, calling for further transparency regarding University fossil fuel investments. The Investment Office subsequently released that 5% of the University’s endowment — nearly $277 million — funds fossil fuel investments. Historically, endowment spending has been kept a mystery to the public, but when these priorities diverge, it is important for the University to be transparent. A student seat on the Board of Trustees would be a step in this direction.
Filling this position through popular vote by graduate and undergraduate students would provide quite a different perspective to the Board, bridging the gap between the lived experiences of students and the small group of wealthy and powerful people that make up the Board.
In the past decade, USC pushed tremendously to rebrand and cement itself as a top-tier university. In academics, research, donations, athletics and the like, everything seems to follow this push to become even better, but to truly lead the way forward, USC must advocate for its own stakeholders — students, faculty and staff — and establish at least one seat for each on the governing board and committees.
Cornell University leads the way in this administrative transparency, seating two elected students on its Board of Trustees — it is the only Ivy League university to do so. Rutgers and Penn State also employ similar policies.
Moving forward, USC must ensure that students, faculty and staff are in the conversation of key decisions and at the forefront of how decisions are made. Provost task forces, campus culture sessions and town halls are small steps forward, but what needs to occur is lasting change.
This idea of codetermination can give students, faculty and staff a tangible stake and voice in the involvement of USC. Establishing this seat is a continuation of the small changes in USC’s insular culture that we have already begun to see, and in reality, this proposal fundamentally reassesses the nature of who — and what — the Board of Trustees is meant to serve.
Last November in the same Los Angeles Times article, Caruso said that the discussion of adding faculty and student representation to the Board was “going to come down the road.” He added that the Board was “still taking this [process] in pieces.”
USC cannot be incremental in change. It is Folt and the Board of Trustees’ responsibility to be bold in change, substantively reversing the direction in which USC has been heading.
USC’s mission statement contains a phrase that particularly stands out in this discussion: “USC is pluralistic.” Codetermination by way of student, faculty and staff representation on the Board of Trustees extends this pluralism and serves as a necessary starting point for change on our campus.