If anyone wants to immediately raise any NYU Abu Dhabi student or administrator’s blood pressure, just mention any of the following: Go Local, stipend, special provisions, Bed4Bed, shuttles, study away, add/drop period, symptom checker, dining halls, fitness center or RTC memos.

These have been some of the most controversial issues on campus that sparked intense frustration among the student body, a great deal of which has been directed toward university administration and leadership. These issues have been controversial not only because they have completely derailed the idyllic NYUAD experience we were promised when we enrolled, but also due to the way in which they were communicated.

Just 10 days before fall semester stipends were to be distributed, students received word that they would no longer receive the traditional cash stipend. The Go Local program was leaked on Facebook and Student Portal before any official announcement, causing student confusion and panic about whether to apply without adequate information about the program. The decision to suspend shuttle services to multiple locations was made with no announcement or prior notice to student leaders. The decision to discontinue university use of Wirecards was communicated initially only to students on full scholarship, although many partial aid students had funds on their Wirecards from study away stipends or student assistantship pay. Miscommunication with Public Safety officers led to false information about students being required to wear cloth masks instead of surgical masks and being forbidden to enter residential buildings aside from their own.

Suffice it to say, there has been no shortage of miscommunications between university leadership and the student body. As a result, a number of students are increasingly losing faith in the university’s ability to be straightforward and forthcoming. This poses challenges for the university, as diminished faith in the institution leads to lower student engagement in the community. This is a time when we need clearer, more consistent communication than ever, and students, understandably, are upset when major changes are poorly communicated with little notice or student input. We are living in a time of ultimate uncertainty so it’s crucial to have as much clarity as possible.

As a student body, we cannot reasonably expect the administration to magically fix every problem before it even arises. But in a seemingly never-ending pandemic, every one of us is afraid of and anxious about the unknown. Because of that anxiety, we always want to have as much information as possible. Students would rather hear from the administration that a potential policy change is coming and that the leadership is waiting on more details as they try to solve the problem. Instead, we suddenly receive short notice emails stating that a huge change is happening with little explanation or time to adjust.

The most notable example of this was the suspension of the traditional stipend. In the question and answer portion of a forum hosted by the administration about the decision to revoke cash stipends, it was shared that the university had actually known this decision was coming for at least a month before it was communicated to students. Not wanting to cause unnecessary stress by announcing things before having a fully developed plan of action is understandable, but it also shuts students out and makes us feel like children that have to be protected from the real world. In the case of the stipend, it would have been better to know a change was coming, even without a detailed alternative plan, so students could prepare for that loss of income. Finding out about the change so late put many students in an unfortunate, time-sensitive situation, especially for those who were relying on the stipend money to pay for Covid-19 PCR tests and other travel expenses that weren’t covered by the university for the fall semester.

Students should, instead, be actively involved in these conversations. Certain members of Student Government are a part of committees and conversations about these issues, but there is no way for these few students to fully represent the needs and ideas of the entire student body. Allowing more students to play an active role in decision making and reducing the number of seemingly unilateral decisions would be a great way to improve communication. Students have no shortage of ideas and opinions about how to improve student experience during the pandemic, but a lot of these ideas are never communicated to the administration.

A lot of students don’t speak up about their thoughts on the student experience because they don’t think anyone will want to listen. In the aftermath of the stipend announcement, the student body came together to brainstorm alternatives to a cash stipend and how to attract vendors. A lot of these ideas were never heard by the leadership because of the chaos of the delayed announcement. Had students been included in the conversation earlier on, when the university initially learned about changes to stipend disbursement, not only would students feel as though their needs and wants were better represented, but it also might have relieved some of the pressure the leadership was facing to create alternatives.

Students might be more willing to vocalize their opinions if they felt that institutional leaders were more accessible. Getting the majority of updates from RTC email aliases or the office of Vice Chancellor Mariët Westermann feels impersonal and detached. We want to see more personal communications and interact directly with the university leadership. The most effective segments of previous forums about stipends, study away and other topics have been those in which members of the Dean’s office or other leaders acknowledge how unfortunate the situation is.

Clearly, the administration is capable of doing better. On Feb. 11, Kyle Farley, Dean of Students, and the 15 members of the Student Conduct Committee sent an email to all students about Covid-19 restrictions, reporting violations and individual sanctions for disregarding these restrictions. It was a very clear bullet list of current restrictions in place, providing a reporting process for violations, potential sanctions for violations and a reminder of the collective consequences the community will face if we continue to ignore health and safety guidelines.

In the email, Farley wrote that the Student Conduct Committee is prepared to take action against those community members who violate health guidelines. He directly addressed several issues that students have raised, including the introduction of reporting processes, a clear outline of sanctions for violating guidelines and an honest closing paragraph about what students stand to lose if we continue to ignore restrictions. It was a much needed, honest and direct communication which reminded students of our responsibility to ourselves and others. When I read this email, I didn’t feel like I was being protected or talked down to. We need more of this blunt communication that leaves no room for interpretation and clearly outlines what’s at stake.

As students, we can’t be left in the dark and subjected to huge policy changes on short notice with little tangible justification. It causes unnecessary, widespread anxiety and panic, which in turn clogs communication channels. Asking for our feedback and opinions and including us in the conversation from early on prevents negative reactions when changes happen.

Admittedly, students aren’t blameless either. Frustration with poor communication shouldn’t come at the cost of compassion towards staff and administration who have little say in what’s happening. But at the end of the day, we just want to be included in the conversation and understand the decisions that are made. We don’t want to be protected; we want honesty. We want to see more and hear more from leaders of the institution rather than receiving updates through Student Government or RTC memos. We need more open and inclusive dialogue, and it starts with making students feel comfortable and like equal stakeholders in ongoing conversations about life on campus.