AIHEC Uproar

Students in the American Indian Higher Education Consortium Club were upset with Haskell’s Administration. This club’s focus is “to prepare Haskell students to participate and or compete in American Indian Higher Education Consortium’s Annual Student Conference”. The club’s order of operations includes eligibility and requirements for attending AIHEC. Years prior, AIHEC Club sponsors selected active club members to take to AIHEC conferences; the club perceived that this year Haskell’s administration was removing the club’s ability to self elect participants and was making student selections outside of the club regardless of active club participation.

AIHEC Club members were disappointed. Many members who have been active participants and involved in previous semesters and leadership of the club were concerned they would be excluded from the list of approved students.

The AIHEC Club reached out to Jim Rains, PhD., expressing their concerns in a letter. The main points in the letter were that the club disagreed with excluding students based on academic probation that didn’t factor in their cumulative grade point average, that active AIHEC members were not prioritized, and that  AIHEC Club’s coaches were limited in the decision making. The AIHEC Club also felt that the unspoken attitude spurring these changes stemmed from an expectation for Haskell to bring back trophies.

A preliminary list of approved student participants was sent out to prospective conference attendants that echoed the concerns of the club; it excluded many active members and included students who were not part of the campus organization.

Concerns from students necessitated further meetings with administration. The results of the talks created explicit outlines for student selection. Students would be required to have a 2.0 cumulative GPA as well as good social standing; considerations would be made for active AIHEC Club members and students at sophomore status or above.

When pressed with questions, the administration defaulted and answered that all misunderstandings were taken care of at the meeting which allowed for previously excluded AIHEC Club members to be considered for the final student selection.

Daniel Wildcat, PhD., acting President, said “…we are attempting to make sure we have the broadest student and university participation possible in as many competitions as possible. I have full confidence that the process and determination of student participation will be fair. We should expect nothing less. We do appreciate the AIHEC student club participation and are thankful for their enthusiasm”.

What was not answered were questions regarding the legitimacy of the Student Government Association approving the sanctioning packet that included AIHEC’s policies alluding to their authority to organize and oversee Haskell student participation at the AIHEC Student Conferences. This raises the question of whether the student government has the authority to delegate to a student organization the authority to oversee student interests when funding is provided by the administration who is wanting the most bang for its buck.

1 Comment

  1. What I see here is favoritism. Like with so many actions and decisions taken by Haskell administrator are not in the best interest of the clubs or students in questions. Looks like Dr. Wildcat is starting to flex his power. Why does it always have to be that way? Let students, clubs be part of decision making. I know Haskell has a lot of politics involved from Washington to BIE. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

4 × three =