Whether you spent your summer chasing your dreams as an intern somewhere in the “real world” or chasing some action at the local beer joint, you’d probably be pleased to know that everybody’s favorite University president wasn’t spending his summer break reading Anthropology Monthly and expanding his ever-growing bow tie collection. As evidenced by his Aug. 15 Washington Post editorial titled “Why Not Full-time Education,” SJT spent the prized portion of his summer waist-deep in the quagmire that is the research, analysis and production of University policy.
The editorial was less about pronouncing the advent of drastic change in traditional university scheduling, and more to serve as notice to the D.C. community (as well as it’s fall/spring residents and their parents) that GW will be causing jaws to drop at a location near you in the not-so-distant future. Why will GW be making waves in D.C.? Because any change in the status quo is customarily met with opposition from those who find comfort in the certainty of mediocrity. While University scheduling should clearly be of no consequence to the District community, the University knows that in this city every move they make is made under the increasingly intensive scrutiny of city officials, many of whom made their loathing of GW, major campaign points.
GW’s possible foray into the relatively untested waters of ‘trimesterism’ will be blown out of proportion because we are located in Washington, D.C., which just happens to be on the receiving end of the most highly powered, finely tuned policy microscope in the world – the Washington media. What the good doctor did in his August editorial was help pave the way for a smooth transition to alternative University scheduling by clearly expressing that whatever decision GW announces has been thoroughly and expertly analyzed.
Whether you agree with the proposed trimester system or not at this point is irrelevant. The larger picture is the question – do you agree with GW’s leadership? Not too long ago GW embarked on what has become a explosive growth in building expansion, and in the process they won themselves the last five and next 15 years battling Foggy Bottom residents and the BZA in court. Uninhibited, our University presses on in the faithful hope that the building expansion brings GW closer to the status it desires to achieve. That is the leadership that I want at the helm.
Whether you think the University has sought to advocate trimesters because they want to expand their pocketbooks (which it will certainly do) or as a genuinely academic decision to further our education, rest assured that a trimester decision will come with strong opposition by educational pundits and experts.
With the foreknowledge of major opposition on (just by reading the tea leaves) what appears to be a decision that has already been made, I for one have faith that the leadership of this University can steer our future toward prosperity amidst the toughest critics.
-The writer is a senior majoring in political science.
