Far too often, students get the sense that the administration believes we shouldn’t be involved in major decisions affecting Syracuse University. But, at the end of the day, students play a more definitive role in this university than anything else.

While there is certainly a universal college experience in distrust between administrators and students, SU has had frequent conflicts between these groups and frustratingly little compromise from the administration. In the recent Student Association presidential debate, all three tickets cautiously responded to a statement about pushing the administration by saying that change is slow and they have to work within the system. SU students can’t seem to effect any truly notable change in SU policy, even though they clearly want to.

In February 2021, a year after it began its 32-day occupation of Crouse-Hinds Hall, #NotAgainSU announced it would refuse to work with the administration going forward. The statement argued that SU’s administration practiced a “complete unwillingness to care for and listen to Black students.”

The complicated reality is that the administration seems to prioritize SU’s image above the actual student experience. Chancellor Kent Syverud and the Board of Trustees are obligated to make decisions on behalf of the financial health of the university, not just the students’ lived experience. While it is certainly important to keep the lights on, emphasizing fundraising and fiscal responsibility over student-well being can damage the larger student experience.

For example, during a global pandemic that caused financial strain for people across the country, the university raised tuition by 3.9% despite its ongoing Forever Orange fundraising campaign, which reached $1 billion in June 2021. This move was entirely divorced from the student experience and well-being. Although the Forever Orange campaign focused on raising money for financial aid and research, it also included a $30 million donation for the construction of the National Veterans Resource Center.

While SU has good intentions in providing spaces for the university’s veteran community, the building’s elaborate architecture provides a stark contrast to the dark laundry rooms and concrete dorms where many SU students spend the majority of their time. It builds a sense that this building is meant to be a new place to hold luxurious events, not to directly support student veterans. As soon as it opened, the space was up for rent — advertised for the architectural beauty that likely made it so expensive. The purity of the NVRC’s mission is also undercut by Chancellor Syverud’s own display in the building’s first-floor museum, which names him as one of the most important figures in SU’s history with veterans.

Similarly, the university recently allotted $150 million to transform another building that many students rarely see, Manley Field House. Clearly there is value to the school’s massive sports enterprise, but the building is hardly in disrepair.

Within the context of 2020’s major financial complications, including the pandemic, the SU administration dropped its total operating costs by $29 million to $1.1 billion, an amount that could be covered by the university’s fundraising campaign alone.

The partial refund offered with the suspension of in-person learning in the spring 2020 semester amounted only to a cost of only $26 million. Therefore, the administration could have aided students more if it weren’t putting this money into other developments. The administration also happily accepted $5 million from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act to offset lost revenues.

As the financial costs of the pandemic began to settle, SU’s financial situtaion greatly improved with endowment returns spiking to 30.8% and operating costs dipping below $1 billion — all this in addition to $17 million in federal assistance. Despite this good fortune, the university once again bumped tuition for its students by almost 4%.

It’s difficult to summarize SU’s recent financial history, but the administration’s behavior in 2020 and 2021 demonstrates that SU will continue to place an extreme tuition burden on its students, no matter how much money it receives from donors and federal aid.

SU administration’s relationship with its own students is fundamentally complicated — our collective contribution is something considerably less tangible — we define the school. The Carrier Dome is an impressive logistics operation, but its value comes in the students that fill its seats on game day. Our love for SU comes from the college experience, but the administration allows this to imply an endorsement of its leadership.

There is a lack of solid data on the relationship that SU students have with the administration, but there are several recent and clear examples of conflict and disputes, even beyond #NotAgainSU. The university’s February 2021 executive overview on the State of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion reported that 43% of students were unsatisfied with the campus climate. Across the board, marginalized groups were considerably less satisfied than their peers.

SU has consistently scrambled in the past few years to ensure that student complaints are “heard.” I experienced this first hand as a resident adviser, when RAs collectively protested a rush of new out-of-contract job requirements at the end of the spring 2021 semester. Though the SU Office of Student Living opened up a meeting for us to express our complaints, it quickly became clear that they would refuse to compromise, only explaining why we couldn’t possibly be prioritized over those working in the Office of Student Living.

The university communicates in a highly cautious sense with its own students; guarded phrases in perfectly crafted announcements to the student body demonstrate compassion, but are careful not to promise anything at all. This lessens the value of the communication entirely — the administration might “hear” us but is by no means obligated to listen. It may seem like an intangible criticism that the administration relies so heavily on public relations in dealing with its student stakeholders, but the impact is a sense of detachment between the university’s decision makers and its students.

Frustrations about the administration’s consistent decision to raise student tuition are mostly an example of adding insult to injury. Even a cursory glance at SU’s recent financial reporting shows that this school has an incredible capacity to grow, but this effort is decided more so by its robust fundraising infrastructure than pulling a few thousand more dollars each out of the pockets of students and their families. Like many students, I have been forced to make hard decisions surrounding this university’s high cost, so its messaging can read as belittling at times.

This is college, a life experience that is unique in both its freedoms and constraints. The basic college experiences of friends and adventure and youth aren’t something we can just thank the university for providing to us. We have to keep this in mind 10 to 20 years down the line when we start getting harassing emails for donations — not to the school but to the administration.

So to SU students, consider your experience not just holistically at SU, but with the administrators, because they are your collaborators on the project of SU. They are working with you, not for you.

If you want something, demand it. Don’t let your demands fizzle into backroom discussions. Your greatest strength is pushing back against their effort to control public image. Rally to unionize student workers on campus. Demand further financial transparency. This isn’t above our pay grade when we’re the ones paying.

Patrick Fox is a Junior International Relations Major. His column appear bi-weekly and he can be reached at pfox02@syr.edu.

Published on April 10, 2022 at 11:13 pm