In February, the University announced it was conducting an in-depth review of its athletics department. According to a Feb. 5 press release, the project was intended to “define what the Queen’s community expects of Athletics & Recreation at Queen’s.” Former Dean of Student Affairs and computing professor Bob Crawford, who led the review along with Dean of the School Graduate Studies and Research Janice Deakin, said the review would help the University define its “philosophy of sport.” The review’s original deadline was March 30.
In late May, Crawford said the report had been completed and ed to Principal Karen Hitchcock, who was planning the University’s response.
A month later, it’s still there, and no one in Hitchcock’s office can say what she’s doing with it, when it will be released or why the report’s publication has been delayed for so long.
For a project with such ambitious goals and far-reaching implications, this state of affairs is disappointing, to say the least.
The Athletics Review has the potential to shape Queen’s athletics for the next decade or more. Similar reviews have caused schools such as Carleton University, Brock University and the University of Western Ontario to completely rethink their approach to athletics, often cutting some sports in order to free up resources for others.
If Queen’s is to do the same, there’s no doubt that process should be as thorough as possible. Athletics are a vital part of the Queen’s experience for many students, and changes to the department should not be taken lightly.
An obvious concern the delay elicits, of course, is when these changes will be implemented. As Athletics Director Leslie Dal Cin told the Kingston Whig-Standard, the later into the summer the report is released, the harder it will be to put any of its suggested changes into effect.
The University’s lack of transparency in this regard is an even greater concern. To be late in releasing a report is one thing, and has become almost institutionally de rigueur. To refuse to answer questions as to why the report is late, what is being done with it right now or even when it’s being released not only keeps stakeholders in the dark, it also gives the impression that the University is uncertain of the report’s recommendations, and fearful of possible fallout resulting from them.
That’s hardly a winning combination.
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].