Thank you, Ms. Brockington. Your article is well-written and well-conceived.
First, you clarified that it was NOT the Editorial Board - despite it being credited that way - who wrote the grotesque piece calling Howard students stupid. It is truly comforting to know that an entire set of people at a respected publication did not agree with the insulting assessments and an illogical tactical argument made by an as-yet-unnamed individual. Thank you.
Second, while you did not apologize for that horrendous and insulting piece published four days ago, you distanced yourself and the Board from it… enough. Enough that all your readers now understand you and the Board reject its disrespectful tone and false premises. Thank you.
This may be as much as we can expect if you are to maintain civility with your colleagues at HBCU Digest. So, I thank you for the veiled rebuttal. I don’t expect you to address whether the anonymous writer collaborated with the very recently employed Howard University “Communications” staffer.
However, in the spirit of full disclosure and to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest, the adjacent nature of the relationship should have been stated upfront by HBCU Digest / Education News Flash.
Now to the substance of what you wrote, Ms. Brockington.
You did more than suggest that it is the Administration and the Board of Trustees which are responsible for 1) the current situation and 2) taking the needed steps to resolve it.
Bravo!
However, and with respect, I wish to point out a central flaw in your principal thesis. Namely, that this is essentially a communications issue. I offer below evidence for my assertion. You said:
“…this is the perfect combination of intergenerational communication issues. Miscommunication (and the inability to effectively communicate between all campus stakeholders) is at the center of the Howard University Student Protest.”
And you said:
“…this is the perfect combination of intergenerational communication issues. Miscommunication (and the inability to effectively communicate between all campus stakeholders) is at the center of the Howard University Student Protest.”
The University IS communicating to the rest of the campus about the protest, but the primary message to the protesters is, “NO NEGOTIATIONS and NO DISCUSSIONS” of the student concerns.
That’s not a communications issue.
The University told the students to secure an Attorney and when they did in the full expectation that negotiations could begin, the University then told the Attorney and the students, “NO NEGOTIATIONS and NO DISCUSSIONS.”
University officials offered them only the insistence protesters vacate Blackburn and/or be punished.
That’s not a communications issue.
Moreover, there is much relevant history here.
The University’s approach in this instance reflects a pattern familiar to Alums, Faculty, and others as well. Unfortunately.
A serious-minded group of high-achieving Alums, who had been student leaders, wrote the Board this summer re: the abolishment of the seven Affiliate Trustee positions. I am a former Alumni Trustee and am a proud signatory among many others of that letter. It took about a month for the Board to reply. That group became HOWARD ALUMNI UNITED. Requests in July for documents and questions submitted have not even been acknowledged, let alone, responded to.
One simple question has been posed repeatedly:
- “HOW MANY AFFILIATE TRUSTEES WERE ON THE COMMITTEE THAT PRESENTED THE MOTION TO ABOLISH AFFILIATE TRUSTEES?”
A different and younger set of Alumni - composed of former Student Trustees – wrote the University also. The response to them was perfunctory.
The Board invited one concerned group of Alumni to a "Listening Session." The Board set a hard stop at one hour, which - if they had their way - would have given each Alum on the call about 70 seconds to speak – but it was less because the hour included introductions, etc.
When asked one question during that session, the Chairman at first avoided it, and then, when asked a second time, called it inquisitorial.
Here's the (softball) question - verbatim:
- "In your opinion, Mr. Chairman, what was the most valuable benefit to the Board of having Affiliate Trustees as voting members?"
Many emails from the Faculty Senate’s President to University leadership have gone unanswered. Same with emails from individual Alums.
Petitions submitted by Howard Alumni United have not even been acknowledged by the Board.
A non-tenured faculty group has been trying for THREE YEARS to seriously discuss their unionization effort. Delay. Delay. Delay.
Some parents - not to mention students, of course, - express extreme frustration about non-responsiveness to their requests and inquiries.
During Homecoming, the Campus Life office warned all fraternities and sororities that the chapters' status could not be guaranteed if they gave support in certain ways to #BlackburnTakeover. One Divine Nine organization advised its members not to wear their letters if they visited Blackburn to support the protest.
The totality of these situations is much more than an issue of communications.
But if HBCU Digest insists on characterizing it as such, then I suggest it is irresponsible not to clearly point out WHO is failing to communicate.
As to the current protest:
The students of #BlackburnTakeover are begging University leadership for constructive communication and NOT punishment. Look at their demands. Two of the four are requests for meetings! As they often say, “Our demands are not demanding.”
Who's at fault for a lack of communication when the University's position is to lay down OBVIOUSLY unacceptable pre-conditions and say, 'NO NEGOTIATION' and 'NO DISCUSSION of students concerns.'
Finally, Ms. Brockington, you said:
“We are at a critical impasse because of communication issues.”
This is true only in the sense that the University has chosen the wrong messages to communicate. I believe, considering what I have cited, the Editorial Board must agree. In your next article, I hope you will make that as clear as spring water.
I have tried, but the irony cannot be ignored.
Ms. Brockington, you blame a failure in communication for the problem, and Mr. Jarret L. Carter, Sr., the founder of HBCU Digest, works on the communications staff at Howard.
Nonetheless, “Veritas et Utilitas” at Howard University will survive – despite the current impasse, which we agree must be resolved now.
It is time for the University to negotiate and find a solution.
Always for Howard!
Bill “Damani” Keene
Student Leader 1962-1966
HU Class of 1966 & Distinguished Military Graduate
Ms. Brockington, Since the first article by an unnamed person was accessible without a subscription, I want to suggest your well-written essay also be freely available.
A university’s mess is getting live streamed to potential students and they’re aware of issues before the administrators can call a plumber, an exterminator or even the police. Even the awareness of tuition, debt loads and education alternatives (competition) has increased. Let’s hope administrators realize the game has changed and the dismissive explanations & excuses won’t cut it with today’s students like it used to in years past. Some tough painful discussions and decisions need to be made like yesterday, cause the clock is ticking.
Honest talk about the situation. If you are in a leadership position, you have to be engaged as today's society has little patience or tolerance for it. As an African-American, you do not have the luxury of using status, age, or position to avoid the voice of the younger generation. The younger generation is willing to call out people, rightfully or wrongly, without regard to tradition. As a result, you have to master communication and the various tools available to reach out and talk with them. Otherwise, hell hath no fury than a pissed out name your younger group of generation.
Well said! Shared governance leads to better outcomes all around but it requires frank communications, which requires mutual trust and respect. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Brockington. Your article is well-written and well-conceived.
First, you clarified that it was NOT the Editorial Board - despite it being credited that way - who wrote the grotesque piece calling Howard students stupid. It is truly comforting to know that an entire set of people at a respected publication did not agree with the insulting assessments and an illogical tactical argument made by an as-yet-unnamed individual. Thank you.
Second, while you did not apologize for that horrendous and insulting piece published four days ago, you distanced yourself and the Board from it… enough. Enough that all your readers now understand you and the Board reject its disrespectful tone and false premises. Thank you.
This may be as much as we can expect if you are to maintain civility with your colleagues at HBCU Digest. So, I thank you for the veiled rebuttal. I don’t expect you to address whether the anonymous writer collaborated with the very recently employed Howard University “Communications” staffer.
However, in the spirit of full disclosure and to avoid any appearance of conflict of interest, the adjacent nature of the relationship should have been stated upfront by HBCU Digest / Education News Flash.
Now to the substance of what you wrote, Ms. Brockington.
You did more than suggest that it is the Administration and the Board of Trustees which are responsible for 1) the current situation and 2) taking the needed steps to resolve it.
Bravo!
However, and with respect, I wish to point out a central flaw in your principal thesis. Namely, that this is essentially a communications issue. I offer below evidence for my assertion. You said:
“…this is the perfect combination of intergenerational communication issues. Miscommunication (and the inability to effectively communicate between all campus stakeholders) is at the center of the Howard University Student Protest.”
And you said:
“…this is the perfect combination of intergenerational communication issues. Miscommunication (and the inability to effectively communicate between all campus stakeholders) is at the center of the Howard University Student Protest.”
The University IS communicating to the rest of the campus about the protest, but the primary message to the protesters is, “NO NEGOTIATIONS and NO DISCUSSIONS” of the student concerns.
That’s not a communications issue.
The University told the students to secure an Attorney and when they did in the full expectation that negotiations could begin, the University then told the Attorney and the students, “NO NEGOTIATIONS and NO DISCUSSIONS.”
University officials offered them only the insistence protesters vacate Blackburn and/or be punished.
That’s not a communications issue.
Moreover, there is much relevant history here.
The University’s approach in this instance reflects a pattern familiar to Alums, Faculty, and others as well. Unfortunately.
A serious-minded group of high-achieving Alums, who had been student leaders, wrote the Board this summer re: the abolishment of the seven Affiliate Trustee positions. I am a former Alumni Trustee and am a proud signatory among many others of that letter. It took about a month for the Board to reply. That group became HOWARD ALUMNI UNITED. Requests in July for documents and questions submitted have not even been acknowledged, let alone, responded to.
One simple question has been posed repeatedly:
- “HOW MANY AFFILIATE TRUSTEES WERE ON THE COMMITTEE THAT PRESENTED THE MOTION TO ABOLISH AFFILIATE TRUSTEES?”
A different and younger set of Alumni - composed of former Student Trustees – wrote the University also. The response to them was perfunctory.
The Board invited one concerned group of Alumni to a "Listening Session." The Board set a hard stop at one hour, which - if they had their way - would have given each Alum on the call about 70 seconds to speak – but it was less because the hour included introductions, etc.
When asked one question during that session, the Chairman at first avoided it, and then, when asked a second time, called it inquisitorial.
Here's the (softball) question - verbatim:
- "In your opinion, Mr. Chairman, what was the most valuable benefit to the Board of having Affiliate Trustees as voting members?"
Many emails from the Faculty Senate’s President to University leadership have gone unanswered. Same with emails from individual Alums.
Petitions submitted by Howard Alumni United have not even been acknowledged by the Board.
A non-tenured faculty group has been trying for THREE YEARS to seriously discuss their unionization effort. Delay. Delay. Delay.
Some parents - not to mention students, of course, - express extreme frustration about non-responsiveness to their requests and inquiries.
During Homecoming, the Campus Life office warned all fraternities and sororities that the chapters' status could not be guaranteed if they gave support in certain ways to #BlackburnTakeover. One Divine Nine organization advised its members not to wear their letters if they visited Blackburn to support the protest.
The totality of these situations is much more than an issue of communications.
But if HBCU Digest insists on characterizing it as such, then I suggest it is irresponsible not to clearly point out WHO is failing to communicate.
As to the current protest:
The students of #BlackburnTakeover are begging University leadership for constructive communication and NOT punishment. Look at their demands. Two of the four are requests for meetings! As they often say, “Our demands are not demanding.”
Who's at fault for a lack of communication when the University's position is to lay down OBVIOUSLY unacceptable pre-conditions and say, 'NO NEGOTIATION' and 'NO DISCUSSION of students concerns.'
Finally, Ms. Brockington, you said:
“We are at a critical impasse because of communication issues.”
This is true only in the sense that the University has chosen the wrong messages to communicate. I believe, considering what I have cited, the Editorial Board must agree. In your next article, I hope you will make that as clear as spring water.
I have tried, but the irony cannot be ignored.
Ms. Brockington, you blame a failure in communication for the problem, and Mr. Jarret L. Carter, Sr., the founder of HBCU Digest, works on the communications staff at Howard.
Nonetheless, “Veritas et Utilitas” at Howard University will survive – despite the current impasse, which we agree must be resolved now.
It is time for the University to negotiate and find a solution.
Always for Howard!
Bill “Damani” Keene
Student Leader 1962-1966
HU Class of 1966 & Distinguished Military Graduate
Air Force Officer 1966-1970
Cornell University, M.A. in Education
HU Student Affairs staff 1972-2004 (Retiree)
- Including Dean for Residence Life (1984-1998)
HU Alumni Trustee 2014-2017
Founding Member, Howard Alumni United
Ms. Brockington, Since the first article by an unnamed person was accessible without a subscription, I want to suggest your well-written essay also be freely available.
A university’s mess is getting live streamed to potential students and they’re aware of issues before the administrators can call a plumber, an exterminator or even the police. Even the awareness of tuition, debt loads and education alternatives (competition) has increased. Let’s hope administrators realize the game has changed and the dismissive explanations & excuses won’t cut it with today’s students like it used to in years past. Some tough painful discussions and decisions need to be made like yesterday, cause the clock is ticking.
Honest talk about the situation. If you are in a leadership position, you have to be engaged as today's society has little patience or tolerance for it. As an African-American, you do not have the luxury of using status, age, or position to avoid the voice of the younger generation. The younger generation is willing to call out people, rightfully or wrongly, without regard to tradition. As a result, you have to master communication and the various tools available to reach out and talk with them. Otherwise, hell hath no fury than a pissed out name your younger group of generation.
Well said! Shared governance leads to better outcomes all around but it requires frank communications, which requires mutual trust and respect. Thank you.