Two weeks ago, I received a phone call from an unknown New London area phone number. It was Dean Arcelus, calling in response to my email, which had expressed a concern over the lack of information surrounding commencement decisions such as selecting the student graduation speaker and class marshals. Over Spring Break, I had emailed Dean Arcelus to share my disappointment that both of the class marshals chosen to represent the Class of 2015 at Commencement, were men. I do not mean to say that I think either of chosen class marshals are undeserving of this honor; I merely think that there are many worthy individuals for the position, many of whom, in our 60% female class, are women. A few weeks before spring break, an email from the 2015 class president, Eleanor Hardy, announced the class marshals who had been selected by the senior class council. This surprised me, as I had heard nothing about the process until the decision was already made, and felt that such a decision should be based on input from more than four members of the senior class. Additionally, I asked Dean Arcelus to tell me more about the process of choosing the graduation speaker, as the news about the class marshals led me to fear a lack of transparency and shared governance when it comes to commencement ceremony decisions. I was surprised to learn that the class marshals were responsible for choosing the student graduation speaker along with Dean Arcelus. I question how these two individuals can fairly represent the Class of 2015, not only because they are both male, but because they are two out of our class of nearly 500 students.
Over the phone, Dean Arcelus walked me through the student commencement speaker process, and emphasized how student graduation speakers are chosen based on the content of their intended speeches. After the initial nomination process (which is open to the Class of 2015, faculty, and staff), the student nominees’ files are reviewed, and they are then invited to write a preliminary speech outline. About two-dozen seniors usually participate in this stage, and the selection committee then narrows this number down to a pool of eight or nine students. The student graduation selection committee is made up of the two senior class marshals, Dean Arcelus, Merrill Collins from Events and Catering, Debra MacDonald from the Office of Communications, and David Jaffe of the Theater department. This year, Dean Arcelus has added Eleanor Hardy to this committee, to represent the Class of 2015 along with Mike Clougher and Matt Safian, in the absence of a female class marshal. The remaining candidates are then asked to craft a full-length speech draft and preform it for the committee in Palmer. Speeches are judged based on their content, as well as how they are delivered. Once the student is chosen, he or she will receive help from the staff members for both writing and presentation.
After speaking to Dean Arcelus, I questioned my original desire for a vote, open to all seniors that would choose the student graduation speaker. While I think the fact that normally only two seniors are involved in the selection process could be problematic, I was impressed by the commitment to choosing speakers based on the content of their speeches. This avoids making the process into a popularity vote, and puts students on an equal platform, as they are offered support along the way. However, if the class marshals are honored with the role of choosing the speaker, the process for selecting the marshals should be well thought out and should take input from the senior class. I spoke to Eleanor on the issue and she agreed that inviting more participation from the senior class would be beneficial. She shared with me that the senior class council did not receive any structure or guidance for how to make the selection, and that they attempted to receive nominations through SGA and word-of-mouth, but she agreed that a more widespread invitation for nominations would be an improvement. I asked Eleanor if she thought a voting process would be problematic, and she said yes, because students might “campaign” for the position, which would make it difficult to honor the “un-sung heroes” of the senior class for their unrecognized contributions.
After my conversation with Eleanor and Dean Arcelus, I had more confidence with the existing structure put in place for choosing the student graduation speaker. However, the process for choosing the class marshals, an honorary but important position, needs more work. When it comes to choosing the class marshals, the class council is forced to follow unclear precedents of the past, rather than a structured, inclusive nomination process. All seniors should be asked to participate in nominating class marshals, as they are when it comes to nominating student commencement speakers, so that a variety of students are considered for the honor. I think mandating a one-female, one-male class marshal may not be the solution, but I would suggest that future class councils think about the college’s history and goals of inclusive excellence throughout the process.
It is imperative that the senior class, and student body as whole, be aware of both selection processes before they start. Currently, only students nominated to speak are privy to any other step of the process. Without transparency and clear invitations for participation, the mission of shared governance is not being upheld. Without framework, participation will falter. Seniors deserve to be given a chance to choose who they would like to represent them. In future years, I hope all students will be notified well in advance about the selection process, so they may take time to consider whether or not they would like to be considered for the student graduation speaker. All seniors should be asked to nominate deserving candidates for class marshal, and the class council should be given more support and structure in choosing the students. Commencement is the capstone of our time at Conn, and processes leading up to the event should reflect our deepest commitment to shared governance and full participation. I would like to thank Eleanor and Dean Arcelus for speaking with me, as it is this kind of commitment to direct action, if followed by structural change, that will make Conn truly reflective of its goals as an institution. •