Two recent events brought Brandeis to the Boston Globe’s headlines: our online free-speech fallout and our president’s resignation. Not our stellar academics, our athletics teams, our artistic exploits or our tireless work for social justice. No, it is has been a resignation and a series of controversies which have come to haunt this University’s press coverage during President Lawrence’s tenure. Though I wouldn’t consider that either of these stories define our institutional identity, both should serve as a wake-up call for examining what we as students value in our University and how we can go about shaping its future. President Lawrence’s resignation is unfortunate for our campus, but we should capitalize on our current phase of transition to form a University and community that better reflects the values which unite us and take the opportunity to build more cooperative relationships with a new administration. 

I was originally writing this article on how students can shape the presidential search process and the qualities that I would like to see in our next president. The summary is that the process will have strong student voice through one (or hopefully multiple) student representatives, and what we as students want in a president will be heavily considered by the larger Board of Trustees. But far more than the actual search, what will shape our experience with our next president will be the way that we choose to interact with them, how we choose to appeal to them on student issues and the energy and resolve we bring to their office.

Brandeisians are passionate. This campus’ energy and excitement is what drew me to Brandeis, and I consider us all as blessed to be surrounded by people who care for the world in the way that we do. But caring is accompanied by costs. When the world doesn’t live up to our high expectations for it, passion often yields anger and frustration. This is amplified when directed at our institution, one that occasionally fails to meet our high creed of social justice, and the many responsibilities that accompany that goal. 

Directing anger at our University has occasionally been successful at catalyzing policy change on campus. The 1969 takeover of Ford Hall is a moment of activism in our history that is widely embraced today. But unchecked anger has too quickly become our default mode of operation. Why do we sometimes have belittling memes about our administration’s lack of clarity on sexual assault issues, when many administrators are meeting with students about their very valid concerns? Why do arguments about what we say, and how and where we say it, dominate our time rather than action for that change? It is because frustration is easy, while creating solutions is so much harder. I can’t blame people for being angry about these problems; in most cases, it is well warranted. But when we let anger at the status quo become anger at those at the helm of our University’s policy, we stifle our voices before they can be impactful.

Over the past six months serving on the Board of Trustees and having candid conversations with administrators and staff, I have had the unique opportunity to work on our shared student frustrations in a positive and proactive way. I have seen lines of communication restored between the administration and the students, often previously severed by anger or assumptions of intractability. The head of Library and Technology Services had never heard a student request to open the library earlier, so he didn’t think to. This year, we have been working together with administrators on a plan that will place students directly in the loop on our University’s budgeting process. Students have been demanding this kind of change for years, but we were only successful this year because we asked for it and were willing to make compromises. This year, the Student Union has addressed issues through a commitment to progress and collaboration with the administration, and it has been successful on many fronts. It hasn’t always been effective, and it isn’t always quick, but it is significantly more efficacious than unmetered anger.

Across the board, the current Student Union has found that building and developing relationships between students and our University is an integral part of progress. As always, we encourage students who are passionate about campus change to utilize the Union to provide a connection between the University faculty and staff and its student body. Our new president will not have the time to meet with every student on campus as they get up to speed on the position, but they will certainly offer an open ear to our students’ representatives.

This Wednesday is a perfect example of how positive student discussions can beget University wide awareness. Provost Lynch and President Lawrence will be sitting down to discuss the state of free expression at this institution and at others in the Shapiro Campus Center Theatre at 6 p.m.. This kind of discussion has been widely prompted by students on social media, in the Jan. 23 Justice article “Leak sparks debate on academic freedom,” in Union meetings with administrators, at public faculty meetings and at a Board meeting. As students and faculty, we affirmed that our University needs to have an open discussion on what free speech and expression mean within the context of our campus. When we ask for clarification and discussion, people are usually willing to engage with us.  

President Lawrence’s departure in and of itself doesn’t enable change to occur; there was no aspect of what I propose that he prevented from happening. Rather, accompanying his departure is opportunity, in that it enables us as students to re-examine the relationship we want to have with our president, with our University and with one another. We alone constitute our culture. 

Just like we play a role in creating campus culture, so will our next president. We need a president who embraces our diversity of opinions and is ready to grapple with all of the challenges that accompany our unique institution. We need a president who will celebrate passion over appearances and encourage our students to pursue theirs in every way. We need a president whose face is seen appreciating all that is good on campus, not only in times of anger and crisis. The way students view their president will largely depend on the context that they associate with them. President Lawrence grappled with these issues commendably during his time here, and finding someone to fill those shoes will be difficult. But we also need our student body to encourage and esteem respect for one another and our administration, even when it is difficult, and hold ourselves to the high expectations we share for the world.

Ultimately what will define how happy we are with our next president are the expectations and relationships that we build with them. I hope I am not alone in thinking that we can hold the University accountable to just practices, that we can fully express our passion and energy and that we can do it all in a way that values communication, solutions and respect. I hope our next president, and our student body, think so, too.

—Grady Ward ’16 is a junior student representative to the Board of Trustees.