What ever happened to the Dorey Report?
January 23, 2007
Kristin Fryer
Last year, something happened at a small university campus in Langley. When problems with administration came to light, dissatisfied students spoke out and the Dorey Report was born.
On Jan. 26, 2006, close to 80 people packed the TWUSA office for a ‘town hall meeting.’ Many different concerns were raised, including, among other things, the longstanding issue of the lack of student representation on the Board of Governors.
Fuelled by the feedback received at the meeting, the student association commissioned then-fourth year student Jay Dorey to create a report on governance structures and student involvement. This report, known as the Dorey Repot, was presented to and adopted by TWUSA on Jan. 31, and then presented to members of the Board’s Governance Committee on Feb. 3.
The Dorey Report noted that all members of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) have student representatives on their board, with full voting rights, except TWU, King’s University College and Redeemer University College, which are private institutions. Public universities also make board agendas, minutes, and documents public, a practice TWU does not follow.
The report also found that the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) supports formal input from students, as well as campus-wide committees which discuss policies and issues affecting the broader institution.
The report’s recommendations included: continued advocacy for student representation to the Board of Governors, though not necessarily representation on the Board; some form of open Board meetings; publication of Board agendas, documents, minutes and annual report; and a formal request from TWUSA to have a forum with the Board at least twice per year.
After the presentation of the report, Governance Committee Chair Bob Gordon called it a “very constructive, positive and helpful document for the Governance Committee.”
As well, admitting that communication to and from the Board had been poor, the Committee said that student council would receive a summary of the governance issues discussed at Board meetings.
As a non-voting member of TWUSA, I can confirm that this commitment has been kept. Shortly after the Board met in October, Dr. Raymond met with student council to give a brief overview of things the Board had discussed.
To facilitate better communication with the TWU community, the Board also created a website, through which, according to the site, “it could post updates to the campus community about its actions and deliberations and through which it could receive confidential feedback and comments.”
However, the most recent post on the site dates to Sept. 29, 2006. Prior to that date, there are several posts, including minutes from Board meetings last spring and summer.
The site (which can be found at http://www.piersystem.com/go/site/500/) also includes a form that allows you to join a mailing list. I filled it out at the beginning of the school year, but I am disappointed to report that I have yet to receive any mail.
Certainly, there has been some progress, but the issue of student representation to the Board is far from resolution. It is important for us as students to continue to show our support for this issue, so that it does not fall between the cracks and become forgotten.
The Board has moved towards including a broader spectrum of stakeholders. Alumni are represented on the Board through an ex-officio (non-voting) Alumni member; and the Board now includes a “faculty guest observer” to all regular sessions of its meetings. As students, we too are stakeholders in Trinity Western University. In the four years we spend here, each of us invests not only our money—which, I might note, pays for over 80 per cent of the university’s operating budget—but also our time and energy into this university.
In less than eight months, I myself will be an alumnus of Trinity Western University. When I look back upon my years here—and think about opening my wallet—I want to remember a university that listened to and supported its students. I don’t want to remember a university that paid lip service to students, acting as though it cared about their voice, but ultimately failing to do anything about their concerns.
As Jay Dorey encouraged students at that not-so-long-ago town hall meeting, so also do I encourage you to write letters to administration, the Board, and Mars’ Hill, expressing your concerns and offering solutions.
As the last year has shown, progress is possible—and necessary. Our voices are important.
With files from Mars’ Hill, Vol. 10 Issue 8
Now you go...
4 Responses to “What ever happened to the Dorey Report?”
Got something to say?
A round of applause in your honor for raising attention to this issue again. TWU is a school worth fighting for — let’s hope future students continue to lobby for an institution that we can be proud to have graduated from.
As a TWU and Mars’ Hill alumn, I add my own applause to Melissa’s.
I’m really glad you posted the link to the BOG’s website. I find it very intriguing that the Board’s site isn’t even hosted by TWU’s website and I relayed this minor pet peeve to Dr. Raymond just a few days ago and hopefully we’ll see that change.
But the status of the website means much less than the status of the Board of Governors. There will be changes: that’s for certain. I am praying that the changes which are made will be the best possible changes for all involved.
To a specific point, the Dorey report is not dead. The Student Council has been in correspondence, (both officially and unofficially) with the Governance Committee, pressing for a number of the key recommendations that the Dorey report highlighted. Unfortunately, when it comes to dealing with the “quarterly present” BOG, it takes some time. We are working on it and look forward to the future with a great deal of anticipation and hope.
With response to Norm’s comment about the website, it is understandable that such a communication tool is located outside of the TWU website for various technical and security reasons. While I salute the Mars’ Hill team in their pursuit of openess, I respectfully disagree with Norm’s peeve about the website address. Still, I thank TWUSA for their efforts in this regard and hope that someday these efforts can reduce Trinity’s distractions from “developing Godly Christan Leaders.”