Columbia’s administration released its first draft of the college’s Strategic Plan on March 23—the first day of Spring Break. The 40-page document outlines the college’s five-year plan of action for “Achieving Our Greatness” and specifies six goals. Under each goal are six more goals described in detail along with the efforts that should be taken to implement them. The document is 40 pages of bureaucratic rhetoric that is difficult to decipher but vague enough to get away with. 

Contrary to expectations, however, the feedback regarding the draft of the Strategic Plan has been largely positive since it was posted to the Civic Commons website. Though the questions asked of students and faculty on the draft of the Strategic Plan so far may lend to generating more positive answers, the criticism is constructive and polite.

The draft addresses many of the issues that have plagued the college in recent years. Technological advancements and integration; diversity and inclusion; selective and competitive admissions; and preparing students and their bodies of work for the real world are some of the many points discussed and dissected in the plan. 

It seems that it is not only a document indicative of an administration trying to heal the wounds of past administrations, but an administration defining what kind of college Columbia should be. 

Change is never welcome nor is it ever easy, though, and much of what is discussed in the plan equates to major cuts and changes to the structure of the college itself. However, the fact that the Strategic Plan is called a “draft” is a misnomer considering many of the game-changing strategies outlined in the document have already been implemented—without consensus, approval or input from anyone outside of the administration. 

The pieces of the plan that have already been put into action are the most contentious—the cutting of First-Year Seminar, the faculty buyout and the hefty budget cuts just to name a few. The administration may be able to lessen the blow of these massive overhauls by couching them in the fluff of a possible student center and the overall focus the plan has on students—particularly transfer, graduate and international students. However, the administration has few answers to the many ambitious  and decidedly expensive enterprises the draft proposes.

Furthermore, the fact that six new administrative positions have been added to the college while  the “work force reduction” plans laid out in the draft essentially equate to cutting faculty is evidence that while change may be needed, some of it is still detrimental to the college.

The sentiment the administration has communicated to the college is that this draft of the Strategic Plan is not yet set in stone, and that students and faculty still have input and sway in the final document because, supposedly, this is a collaborative endeavor.

However, if pieces of the plan are already falling into place months before it is finalized or approved, it begs the question: Will any kind of feedback even be addressed, or will the concerns and ideas of students and faculty just echo endlessly into the communication void the administration has placed between itself and the rest of the college?

That said, the administration is taking steps in the right direction. Many of the points detailed in the Strategic Plan draft will transform Columbia from a scrappy underdog to a true contender in the world of arts education. 

The changes and transitions will not be easy, and pushback is inevitable from both sides, but should students and faculty make their voices heard, and should the administration truly take and implement feedback, Columbia may become the college its students deserve.