Katie O’Reilly ‘14, Suzy Chen ‘14
Every April a new batch of hopeful candidates sign up for Student Council and vestry elections and hastily post their speeches on boards around the school. The candidates give their addresses in front of the entire student body and then the students place their votes. The moment of truth arrives when the votes are counted and the new presidents and vestry members are announced. While these types of elections that characterize the Episcopal student’s experience and serve the community seem like the most democratic form of student government possible, other schools in the area are taking a different approach towards elections.
The William Penn Charter School, a Pre-K-12 Quaker day school has developed a different way to elect students into governing positions that they believe has eliminated the “popularity contest” aspect that pervades school elections. Instead of the student body voting for candidates after they have volunteered to fulfill the obligation as a member, The William Penn Charter School has created a nomination committee comprised of students in which they nominate and decide on candidates. If the selected student accepts the duty, they simply become a new student leader.
James Fiorile, a member of the Penn Charter faculty said, “We believe that the decision making process has many different forms and we choose a different method that represents our Quaker school beliefs the best. Therefore we don’t practice the traditional electing system because we believe it did not always work the best for our community.”
Conner Boyle’13, a member of vestry, said, “I think the nomination committee is a good idea. It could totally eliminate the factor of popularity. The best people would be selected to be the leaders of the school.”
Compared to Penn Charter, Episcopal has a far more traditional system of governance. The Student Council is composed of twenty four students and all members are elected by the student body. The president of Student Council is elected by the existing members of Student Council. Likewise, the vestry is comprised of ten members, all of which are directly elected by the student body. The senior and accounting wardens of Vestry are selected by the incumbent members of vestry in a small election.
Angela Miklavcic, a member of the Upper School science department and faculty advisor of Student Council, said, “I really like the fact with our current system, anybody can run if they want to. The candidate can be a rising leader which could often been neglected with this idea of a nomination committee.”
Cheryl McLauchlan, third form dean and faculty advisor of the Student Council agreed, “I like with our system you can chose to run and chose who you want to vote for.”
One of the reasons that Penn Charter generated such a system of selection was to eliminate the influence of popularity in student elections. Fiorile said, “This was a primary reason because the popularity aspect was very much in existence during the process.”
Kayla Coleman ’14, a member of the Student Council, said, “For the most part I think the nomination committee would eliminate the popularity part because the main focus would be on who would turn out to be the best leader.”
Although this idea of a nomination committee could eliminate the popularity aspect of elections, it could also potentially limit the voice of many in the student body. “The Student Council should be elected by the students,” said McLauchlan.
Additionally, Jackie Blickman, Co-president of Student Council said, “I would support the system that we are currently using because it seems to be working, but I realize that the nomination committee idea is a cool concept.”
Jacqueline Chakejian ’12, a member of vestry, also supported Episcopal’s method of selecting student leaders. “I think the nomination committee at Penn Charter eliminates people’s chances. It would create controversy because at EA we focus on the fact that everyone has equal opportunity.”
McLaughlan agreed, saying, “The idea of student council embodies Esse Quam Videri, a key principal of our school.”
Coleman said, “I like the nomination committee idea but it could be a possibility that it works best in smaller schools, so it might not work best at EA.”
While both systems have their pros and cons, Fiorile thinks the nomination election system is a considerable option for other schools, “I highly suggest them to try out this election system. It works out here. And it could also work for other schools.”