UW-Madison Chancellor John Wiley's recent announcement he might submit a proposal to make out-of-class activities mandatory for students has a good base and should be pursued. Having some experience that is not part of the standard track of an undergraduate education is beneficial for students for several reasons, the least of which is Wiley's suggestion that groups look good on a rAcsumAc.
Currently, students can graduate without having any impact on the community around them. Upon leaving the university, students should be able to tell themselves they did something they otherwise would not have done had they not attended UW-Madison; and I do not mean a three-story beer bong (although a beer bong club could happen).
Students should be able to meet people that they would not have otherwise met and/or have experiences that they would not otherwise have had. There is no doubt that some incoming freshmen have anxiety about joining groups when they first arrive. Mandating extracurricular activities for incoming students can only help acclimate them to the school, as well as encourage civic engagement.
This also helps the groups in the university since more students would be actively trying to find an appropriate group. The benefit of this plan greatly outweighs the detriment.
The main complaint against mandatory activities—that some do not have enough time to join a group in addition to the daily grind—is not valid. The requirement to be in a group, club or any kind of out-of-class activity is only as intrusive as the student wants: Different groups have different time constraints. To say some students cannot spare one night a month towards some extracurricular activity is nonsense.
Sure, there are kinks that need to be worked out in the grand scheme of things. There are people who need to work in order to pay their way through college, and they should be exempt from such a policy. But if some students are vehemently opposed or have any other valid reason to not participate in a group, they could send in an appeal for exemption.
Participating in out-of-school activities is hardly painful, and providing the opportunity to appeal out of the process at least forces students to be active in either joining or not joining a group. Students are capable of leading their own lives, but the university has the right to make sure that the students who are not in extracurricular activities actively do not want to be in one.
Wiley explained in his speech that his plan would help pad rAcsumAcs if nothing else, which is not the proper approach. There are plenty of groups that would look meaningless on a rAcsumAc, but would still be worthwhile.
If the plan is to have substance, then there should not be the suggestion that the group is supposed to be rAcsumAc-worthy. Students should not feel pressure to join an academically oriented group just because joining another would seem wasteful on a rAcsumAc.
Furthermore, students can easily reject any plan with broad ramifications put forward by the administration. When the status quo of student life seems to be generally accepted, having students accept a change is difficult. This, however, is the plight of the administration.
Any administrative action comes under close scrutiny, which is appropriate except that the opponents are often much more outspoken than the proponents. Students will protest this plan if it is implemented, and they have every right to do so, but there is also the group of students that are not passionate enough to support one way or another. This is the group the university targets in this plan.
Those students should decide whether they want to participate in the programs that the university has to offer or not. Then the chancellor could rest assured that there are not students sitting at home who just need a little push to be active in extracurricular activities, but are not motivated enough on their own to pursue such opportunities.
