Eli and the Design Committee – Bringing Extra Seats to the Table

Eli is a mid-level manager in the division of Student Affairs. He is appointed to serve as the project manager to oversee the design and construction of a new student union. Now that funding approval is complete, Eli convenes facilities and program leaders to collaborate with architects and designers to review, revise and finalize blueprints for the future student union.

Six months into the year-long process, a program coordinator identifies that student voices are absent from the design team. Initially, the group is embarrassed that they advanced the project without student input and agree that student voice is essential. However, as the team deliberates logistics, a majority of the team agrees that the inclusion of students will require an adjustment to the meeting schedule and hosting meetings and forums in the early evening, or perhaps on weekends. The current committee members are discouraged by the prospect of changing the schedule and ask to proceed with the current plan. They ask that Eli meet with students separately to update them on the progress of the committee and solicit feedback.

Eli challenges this notion, asserting that full inclusion of student voices will require compromise and flexibility from his peers. After some debate, the team agrees to reschedule their meetings to early evening to ensure full student participation. Shortly after the inclusion of student constituencies, critical design changes emerge. Students advocate for several revisions they deem essential to their sense of belonging, including the design of gender-neutral restrooms, foot wash stations and bidets. Students also propose an increase to natural and artificial light to improve conditions for students with unique accessibility and mental health needs.

Key Take-Aways
  • The Issue: Eli assembles a design committee for the development of a new student union. Eli assembles the team and advances committee work without the inclusion of student voices. Six months into the process, the group acknowledges the absence and considers whether inclusion is possible given scheduling challenges.
  • The Deliberation: The current team is discouraged by the demands on students' schedules, and the limits of their availability to meet during business hours. Eli challenges the group’s exclusivity and asks for compromise.
  • The Growth: The team better appreciates the value and necessity of stakeholder representation. The team finds a manageable solution to include student voices and benefits from student input, which improves the design of the future student union, specifically design changes that improve inclusivity for transgender and gender non-conforming students and differently abled students.