During my time as a student, I served in a variety of student governments and other student leadership initiatives from 2008 in late elementary school to the completion of my PhD in 2024. Upon reflecting upon these involvements, I have noticed that, especially at the postsecondary level, there is a certain type of student who tends to absorb many of the scholarships and awards. These award winners typically had some light volunteering, like maybe they were the members of a campus club, and perhaps their grades were okay. However, in terms of the student world, they were inconsequential. Meanwhile, the students leading powerful student governments, working full-time hours or more to regulate multi-million-dollar budgets to ensure continuity of essential student-run services and whose contributions left a lasting impact on their campus communities often went unrecognized. Why is this?
Perhaps it can be partly connected to the award-winners’ abilities to write in the perfect way that awards selection committees like, a way which may exaggerate their contributions to the campus and broader student community. Academic research suggests that this kind of writing is a skill often reserved for privileged students who possess special cultural capital advantages, such as being part of a family with multiple previous generations of university graduates, or having an in with university leadership so they get the inside scoop on the best opportunities well in advance. Students without these advantages are often not told about the scholarships, fellowships, and other opportunities they are eligible for, resulting in this aspect of higher education becoming a hidden curriculum, an aspect of education that is not openly told to students but is more unspoken, that poor and marginalized students are not informed about.
However, I believe the problem also goes deeper in that it can be linked to how student government leaders are typically viewed by university leadership. In my experience, I have noticed that student government advocacy and activism can result in an adversarial relationship between student government leaders and university administrations. I am not talking about tokenistic actions of students that have little to no effect on policy and uphold the status quo, but the real change-making that student leaders engage in to disrupt unjust practices and usher in new ideas. In such scenarios when student leaders achieve even a glimpse of the path toward changing the rules of higher education’s micropolitical game, it seems that they are often met with fierce opposition from unelected non-students who suddenly turn from wise, kindly stewards of higher education into its vindictive, self-interested villains who seek to destroy student opposition by any means necessary. In fact, it is documented that student leaders can face reprisal by these non-students that hinders their academic success. In such a dynamic, how can we reasonably expect a student government leader (or student movement leader for that matter) to have a fair chance of scholarships and awards, even those specifically designed for student leadership?
During and after my time as a student, I have spoken to student leaders around the world who have expressed feeling targeted and excluded from scholarships and awards at their education institutions. Their valour goes unsung (given the number of student leaders who have suffered and died doing advocacy and activism, valour is the correct word to use) and the awards seem to often go to students who do not rock the boat and are complicit in whatever the university administration is doing. It seems these award winners often go on to be hired by university administrations, continuing the cycle for another generation.
Student governments can make their own awards for student leadership achievements, but it is unlikely that the student leaders at the top levels of student governments who are doing the most work are going to give such awards to themselves, as this would probably be seen as inappropriate and could start a precedent that could result in malpractice. These student-run awards would likely go to low to mid-level student leaders who report to the top-level ones.
The solutions to this issue rather need to occur within higher education institutions and how they engage with student leaders and student governments. University administrations should first stop viewing student leaders as adversaries, but rather as net benefits to campus communities to help make them better. Universities should hire more former student government leaders for student affairs positions, instead of fearing their power. Student affairs professionals should be on the side of the students, not the students’ main antagonists. Co-curricular records should be more proactive and expansive, including students’ contributions to their student governments at both campus and supra-campus levels. Student leaders who push the envelope should be praised, not subjected to reprisal. Maybe more students should be on award selection committees who understand how student governments and other forms of student leadership work, and maybe student governments should have a role in choosing these students. If such a culture-change can occur, I believe the recognition given would match the contributions students make to their school communities and the broader education landscape.
