The student forum was a good starting block for necessary changes to occur at Erskine, but there were a lot of problems with the forum and the way it was run. The students that led the forum were, for the most part, all liberal students. If the desire was for it to be non-biased, I think there should have been both liberal and conservative students working on putting together the forum. Also, the event was co-sponsored by SGA (Student Government Association), but SGA had no say in the way the forum was run. Instead, the group of students had the event approved by student government, but then did not allow them any voice in the logistics of the forum.

There were also a lot of problems with the way the emails were censored by the group of students. I sent in several concerns about the Admissions Office, but did not mention any names or single anyone out. The response I received from the group was that my questions could be misconstrued as personally attacks on particular Admissions staff members or particular faculty members. This was frustrating to me, because I was polite in what I said, but still wanted a direct response to my questions. I emailed in three questions: two regarding admissions and one about the lack of integration of faith and learning. My two questions about Admissions were not included in the forum so I did not get to ask them. I realize that they were similar to the concerns of others, but they also had distinct aspects that should have been addressed.

Another problem with the forum was that several students did not have all or even part of their email to read from. I know of one student who had to speak off the top of his head and was made to look foolish by the Administration because of it. Another student had only part of his email in front of him which was frustrating for him. Also, there were seven students, including myself, who asked different questions about integrating faith and learning. This was the largest amount of questions for any category. All of our questions were compiled, by the group of students in charge of the forum, into one general question. We were not allowed to work on what our one question would be, but rather it was done for us. I realize that our questions were similar, but I am certain that they were not identical. Therefore, there were many aspects of this problem that were not voiced because the way things were handled.

There were about five or so questions about the financial aspect of the college which were all allowed to be read. These all dealt with finances, but each added a little different slant on the idea. This was the same with our questions about the integration of faith and learning except that we were not allowed to read our different concerns. The way the Administration responded to the questions was, for the most part, very vague. No one was ever willing to make a firm stand on anything questionable, including top administrators such as the President and Vice-President for Enrollment. The general response was that the hardest thing to be is a Christian Liberal Arts college. This was very frustrating to hear. No one in the Administration had the courage to stand up and defend the Gospel when a professor challenged the requirement for all incoming faculty to believe in the inerrancy of Scripture. It appeared as though no one was willing to risk their reputation in order to stand up for what is right. I believe that the forum was a necessary event, but there is much more that needs to be done for the college to begin to head in the right direction. The forum was a good start, but there were many short-comings that caused it to be unsuccessful.

-Jon Oliphant,
Class of 2012