Jasmine Aquino: Jerry Kang’s student board needs to refocus priorities before it can create change

It’s always promising to see progress, but sometimes progress seems to move at a snail’s pace. Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Jerry Kang’s advisory board, announced in September, follows that pace.

Kang’s board consists of student leaders from different student organizations across campus who have been nicknamed “change agents” because of their roles observing campus climate and combating instances of discrimination.

While still in its infancy, the board is working its footing as the students walk the line between student group and administrative liaisons. They have broken themselves up into five committees that will focus on different aspects of the university, including administration, documents and student organizations. They made a GroupMe and decided on times to meet, and are even going on a retreat this weekend to work out a team dynamic.

Executing events that open spaces for intergroup dialogue is important, but the board should focus on advocacy rather than awareness related to social issues. The board needs to focus less on being another programming committee and really play their roles as reformists by directly and effectively addressing illustrations of prejudice within the student body. Focusing the conversation not on what is happening but instead on what needs to be done and in turn communicating that to the administration is essential.

[Related: Student board helps advise Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion]

Brad Fingard, a third-year political science student and EDI Student Advisory Board member, said that board members were partly chosen based on their previous involvement on campus, from Interfraternity Council to the Hillel Student Board, making it difficult for the board to even find a meeting time convenient for everyone.

“We have a lot of access to resources and are looking into how we can take advantage of that,” Fingard said.

Because of the nature of the board members’ backgrounds, their programming workflow might bleed into their time on the board, but they need to realize that these issues are not eliciting awareness. Discrimination does not happen in concentrated moments but is rather felt every single day.

In order to really communicate progressive and respectful attitudes into the student body, the board needs to focus on utilizing avenues of communication that already exist.

First, the board needs to make its online presence stronger. The EDI office at UCSD, for example, has a Facebook page that puts faces to the board’s name and lists their individual office hours. The UCLA EDI Student Advisory Board does not have a page or offer office hours, and some of its members do not even have social media.

[Related: Equity, Diversity and Inclusion office announces advisory board members]

Sure, the office has a website that incorporates eloquent and welcoming thought experiments, but students are not likely to visit the page, especially amidst the fast-paced timing of the quarter system.

Additionally, the board should follow UCSD’s example in establishing office hours where students can offer feedback, suggestions and experiences for the office’s consideration. While students may not be able to meet with Kang personally, they can at least attempt to have their voices heard in the office.

While it is undoubtedly important to hold events related to issues affecting the campus climate to offer spaces for discussion, these events are already being executed by existing student groups on campus, some of which the board members already serve roles in.

Instead of allowing their amount of involvement on campus to dilute their work in the office, the board should take advantage of their existing eyes, ears and voices and use them to provide visibility to issues related to campus climate.

While students fighting against the oppression salient in higher institutions are beyond resilient, we should not expect them to keep shaking their fists at the moon. We cannot expect them to meet at the board’s terms – or events – and should instead anticipate that the board will work proactively rather than reactively.

While the board works out the bureaucratic regularities of a committee, students on the UCLA campus are continually bombarded with instances of discrimination, from posters with hate speech to student groups holding events with insensitive titles and themes. These events have and will continue to appear on campus while the EDI Student Advisory Board perfects its bona fides.

We should not wait for the appearance of discrimination to talk about topics like rape culture, mental health and simply said, respect.