Letters to the editor serve as a vital contribution to campus conversations, which The Trail aims to facilitate. The views they articulate belong to the authors alone, and publication of letters to the editor does not represent an endorsement of those views by The Trail or any of its contributors.
To the staff and readers of The Trail,
We, the Spring 2026 AFAM 399: Public Scholarship class, are writing in response to this semester’s search process for the new Vice President of Institutional Equity and Diversity (VPIED). Through our course, we are asked to develop a project that engages the campus community, most importantly the student body, which we are a part of. We chose to be involved in the search for the new VPIED to give voice to other students and represent them with a critical lens in African American studies. As students of marginalized identities that the Office of Institutional Equity and Diversity (OIED) aims to serve, the outcome of this search would directly impact us. We decided to write to The Trail because of the disappointment, frustration and disrespect we feel from University leadership.
On Nov. 3, 2025, University President Isiaah Crawford first sent out an email announcing the retirement of the current and inaugural Vice President for Institutional Equity and Diversity, Dr. Lorna Hernandez Jarvis. This email ensured a process in which “We [university administration] plan to begin the search in earnest as soon as possible, and following our customary practice, we will be engaging members of our campus community to assist us with this process. We expect to be joined by our new vice president in summer 2026, and will provide updates to our campus community as they become available.” On Dec. 10, 2025, the campus was then notified that the search would be put on a temporary pause. No further word from the administration was given until Jan. 27, 2026, when President Crawford announced that instead of looking for a permanent position, he himself would appoint an interim vice president with a two-year term due to the announcement of his retirement. President Crawford also wrote that “We will work with a consultancy to identify a short list of 3-4 candidates for consideration. Campus members will have an opportunity to meet the candidates and provide feedback to me prior to my appointment of the Interim Vice President.”
Communication from the University and President Crawford was absent until March 2, a total of 34 days, when an email from Crawford came out about the first candidate’s visit to the school on March 10. On March 9, the campus community was given access to only one resource, a Curriculum Vitae (CV), a document describing his work experience, which he would later discuss in the Open Session. Our class prepared for the visit with the week’s notice. We made lists of questions to ask all of the candidates, emailed affinity-based clubs (e.g., Black Student Union, Coalition Of Multiracial and Biracial Students, Native and Indigenous Student Alliance, etc.) to ask for their opinions and what they would like to see from a VPIED candidate, met with student leadership and read the CV.
On March 10, our class attended the open forum for the candidate. We were five of the seven students present, which affirmed that our presence and our questions would be crucial for representing the student body and providing the perspective of students. After the open forum was the “student stakeholder lunch.” Only select affinity club leaders/executives were invited with little heads-up, including three of our classmates. One classmate was able to attend the lunch with a total of five student representatives. On March 11, the campus community received an email about the candidate’s letter of intent and a form to provide feedback. As a class (and with the knowledge that many faculty were doing the same), we decided not to submit a response, and intended on making a long, comprehensive document with feedback for all of the candidates after attending subsequent open sessions — except that didn’t happen.
On April 23, 2026 — 43 days since the last communication from the University leadership — Crawford announced in an email that the one and only VPIED candidate had been selected, disregarding the promised-yet-apparently-missing 2-3 additional candidates. We feel hurt, cheated and “ghosted” by the University. We are confused as to how the list of three to four candidates became one candidate if the campus community was not notified in the first place. In the same email, Crawford wrote that “feedback from our community regarding his visit last month was overwhelmingly positive.” If the majority of students present were waiting to meet other candidates before providing feedback, who is the community that felt “overwhelmingly positive” about this candidate?
We want to make it known that the decisions made without campus representatives (students, staff and faculty) by the University harm our community, especially those who would be most served by the OIED. We are saddened that President Crawford appointed the one and only VPIED candidate, especially in an age where diversity, equity and inclusion is being targeted nationally. Decisions like these strip us of our voice and autonomy, though we are not shocked given the administration’s habit of making choices without approval, demonstrating blatant disregard for the input of their students.
Yours,
Ethan Chythlook (‘26), Bella Clinton (‘27), Liv Forney (‘26), Trevon Hamilton (‘28), Leah Thomison (‘27)