The Student Life Report Committee presented key recommendations for improving campus engagement at a press conference for their upcoming report Sunday.
“Over the last 5 months we’ve sought out what we like to think of as the limitless upside of student happiness on campus,” report committee chair Shuo Yan Tan (SFS ’12) said.
According to the report’s Editor-in-Chief Matt Hoyt (COL ’12), the Student Life Report investigates aspects of student organization advisory boards, intellectual and student life from a qualitative and quantitative perspective.
The document, which is still in draft form, is slated to be finished and released within the next two weeks. It is the first comprehensive report about student life completed since 1999.
According to Georgetown University Student Association Vice President Greg Laverriere (COL ’12), the report is intended to help provide a better framework for how student money should be allocated. It offers suggestions for improving five student advisory boards including the Student Activities Commission, CSJ, the Advisory Board for Club Sports, the Media Board, the Performing Arts Advisory Council and the Georgetown Program Board, as well as various recommendations for institutional and intellectual improvement.
Many of these recommendations call for expansion of student space, improved transparency among the funding boards and better centralization of information.
The report also includes more specific recommendations, such as combining What’s After Dark and the Georgetown Program Board into one group and moving the Lecture Fund under the purview of GPB.
The committee also analyzed data from questionnaires including the Senior Survey, Enrolled Student Survey and Civic Engagement Survey. Based on this analysis, the committee suggested that there is a positive relationship between engagement in Georgetown-related activities and student satisfaction, calling for an investigation into students that do little to engage in activities on campus.
Hoyt said that he was surprised to discover that board members for the club sports advisory board felt that their needs and interests were often overlooked in favor of Georgetown’s intramural sports.
“People very involved felt alienated and were a distant second in priorities in the eyes of the university and [Yates Field House],” he said.
The committee has recommended a tiered structure for organizing club sports in order to better allocate resources.
To research the issues tackled in the report, GUSA members and volunteers traveled to college campuses, including Stanford, American, and William & Mary Universities to study their institutions and framework for campus life.
The Student Life Report Committee listed William & Mary’s a capella council and Stanford undergraduates’ complete control over their student activities funds as noteworthy aspects of other colleges. Georgetown’s Center for Social Justice stood out when compared to similar organizations at other universities.
“[CSJ is] way ahead of the field and will only get better,” Tan said.
The committee is currently seeking feedback on the report from various campus organizations before the final document is publicly released. GUSA hopes to meet with University President John J. DeGioia to discuss the report.