October 23,2025 Student Life at WashU in St. Louis
WashU will not sign Trump administration’s higher ed compact
ELIZABETH
Chancellor Andrew D. Martin announced that the University will not sign the Trump administration’s proposed higher education compact. In an email sent to faculty midday this Wednesday, Martin wrote that WashU will not sign the compact “or any document that undermines our mission or our core values, perhaps highest among these our commitment to academic freedom, access, free expression, and research integrity.”
Martin’s message was a response to a statement sent by Faculty Senate Council (FSC) leadership after they met with Provost Mark West this Monday. In the statement, FSC leaders called on Martin to reject the compact, citing significant faculty opposition to the proposal.
“We respect Chancellor Martin’s intent to engage in dialogue and recognize the importance of maintaining open and transparent communication with our federal partners,” they wrote Monday. “However, we believe continued ambiguity about WashU’s position risks undermining confidence and clarity within our community.”
In a Tuesday evening faculty meeting, College of Arts & Sciences Dean Feng Sheng Hu indicated to faculty that Martin would not sign the compact in its current state. According to professors present at the meeting, Hu also shared his own opposition to the compact in the meeting.
The Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education promised funding advantages to universities who committed to a wide range of policy changes, including limiting international student enrollment; pledging institutional neutrality; freezing tuition for five years; restricting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives; and requiring standardized testing for admissions.
WashU was not among the nine schools originally invited on Oct. 1 to sign the agreement. As of publication, none of the nine schools had signed the compact, and seven
Demographics cannot be considered in admissions or hiring of faculty
Grades cannot be inflated or deflated for non-academic reasons
The protection of a broad spectrum of ideological viewpoints
What are key points in Trump’s Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education?
Institutional neutrality International students make up less than 15% of undergaduate population
Define gender based on reproductive and biological functions
rejected the proposal.
On Oct. 14, the Trump administration extended the request to sign the compact to any interested university.
Trump administration officials invited WashU, the University of Kansas, and Arizona State University to a White House meeting alongside five of the previously invited universities last Friday, and Martin participated in the meeting.
Afterwards, Martin explained the decision to engage in conversations with the Trump administration, pointing to a need for WashU to advocate for its values by engaging with the process.
“We have chosen to participate in this conversation because we have been invited and with the intention of promoting our mission, values, and independence by having our voice at the table for these potentially consequential conversations,” he wrote in his email to faculty this Wednesday.
White House spokesperson Liz Huston described Friday’s meeting with Martin and other University leaders as “productive” in a statement to the New York Times.
“[Universities] now have the baton to consider, discuss, and propose meaningful reforms, including their form and implementation to ensure college campuses serve as laboratories of American greatness,” she said.
WashU’s decision not to sign on
Standardized testing scores required for all applicants
Reduce administrative spending and streamline academic programs that fail to serve students
Commit to a five-year tuition freeze for American students
to the compact comes after a number of student, faculty, and staff organizations publicly denounced the proposal.
The FSC wrote in their statement that “no university should strive for or be given preferential treatment.”
In response, Martin pointed to Monday’s University-wide email stating that the decision to participate in discussions “was not made to advantage ourselves or gain any type of preferential benefit.”
“We firmly believe meaningful progress will best be achieved through open, ongoing dialogue,” Martin wrote in the Monday email.
“We appreciate the invitation to participate in this critical conversation and are showing up ready to engage, listen, and work collaboratively toward positive change.”
WashU’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) released a statement last Friday urging WashU to reject the compact.
“We must stand with those who resist,” the statement reads. “Every school that signs Trump’s compact will encourage the worst impulses of leadership at other institutions.
Yet every school that publicly stands in opposition makes it easier for the next one to do so.”
This Monday, a statement urging
SPENCER | DESIGN EDITOR
Chancellor Martin to not sign the compact was posted on Instagram by several student groups, including the Coalition for Liberated Students, WashU’s National Association for the Advanced of Colored People (NAACP) chapter, and WashU’s Association of Latin American Students (ALAS).
Endorsed by 19 student organizations overall, the statement said the compact “puts academic freedom in jeopardy and threatens WashU community members that hold marginalized identities.”
“This proposal represents a frightening attack on the well-being and success of students of color, queer students, and disabled students, who collectively comprise a majority of the WashU undergraduate student body,” the post reads.
In his email this Wednesday, Martin shared that he appreciated the engagement of faculty and looked forward to continued dialogue, including at an upcoming Faculty Senate meeting this Thursday. He also asked for trust from the University community as the administration navigates complex issues.
“The issues in front of us are complex and extremely challenging, and I ask for your trust that we are acting in the best interest of our university and higher education.”
SU senators express apprehension to University-proposed mask ban and policy for students barred from campus
PETER EISWERT
CONTRIBUTING WRITER
A newly drafted protest protocol by an administrationcommissioned task force would prohibit masks for nonmedical reasons and provide protocols for students barred from campus. Student Union (SU) senators were concerned over racial profiling, lack of clarity of language, and concerns about housing insecurity for suspended students, Oct. 14.
“I have so many problems with this policy that I can’t even articulate,” senator and junior Matthew Broome said.
The proposed protest protocol is the product of a task force commissioned by Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Anna Gonzalez to assess and revise protest protocol following the campus protests during April of 2024. The task force focused on responding to some of the shortcomings of the University’s response to April 2024 protests.
“Those policies, [including] the decision to suspend a student and the nature of that suspension are within the province of the
administration,” reads page 26 of a report on the protest response.
“The committee, however, does find that Dr. Gonzalez and her staff acted in good faith in the decision that they made in barring the suspended students from campus.”
Following the arrests of 23 WashU students during the April 27 protest and encampment, all of the students were notified they were temporarily suspended and barred from University property. Six of the students lived in WashU housing and were given 24 hours to pack up their belongings.
SEE PROTEST PROTOCOL, PAGE 3
ArtSci dissolves task force considering departmental reorganization
MATT EISNER
Dean of WashU’s College of Arts & Sciences Feng Sheng Hu announced the end of the task force created to explore the reorganization or consolidation of six separate academic departments and programs in the humanities at a Tuesday evening faculty meeting, Oct. 21. The dissolution of the task force means that Arts & Sciences is not moving forward with any restructuring of the six departments, although task force members said ArtSci may revisit its work as it looks to address inefficiencies in the departments in the future.
On Sept. 10, Student Life reported that Arts & Sciences created the “Social Transformation” task force to consider a departmental reorganization, including the possibility of a merger, of African & African American Studies (AFAS); American Culture Studies (AMCS); Education; Global Studies; Jewish, Islamic, and Middle Eastern Studies (JIMES); and Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies (WGSS).
Over a month after the committee was initially formed, its members recommended to Hu that he dissolve the committee. Leaders of the task force said that the decision to end its work was due to student and faculty opposition and a lack of transparency from administrators, among other factors.
“Faculty, students, and alumni expressed serious concerns about the timing given the current political climate, the lack of a clear intellectual rationale, the absence of clarity about what specific problems the initiative was meant to address, and the lack of faculty involvement before the initiative was launched,” task force co-chair and chair of AFAS Shanti Parikh wrote in an email to Student Life.
“Ultimately, the dean accepted our recommendation to bring the task force to a close.”
In conversations with faculty and student stakeholders, the task force identified major skepticism towards a potential merger — skepticism that many members of the group held themselves, according to Parikh.
All but three members of the seven-member task force resigned from their roles Monday night. In a resignation email acquired by Student Life, one member of the committee wrote they felt that Hu was not taking into account the task force members’ recommendations and that the dean instead treated them as “obstructions.” According to Parikh, after the mass resignation, Hu responded quickly and decided to eliminate the task force.
“After some of us decided to step down from the committee, he understood the urgency of our recommendation, and he responded accordingly,” Parikh said. “And for that, I commend him, and I support his decision to suspend the task force’s work.” In a statement provided to Student Life Wednesday evening, Hu wrote that the task force’s initial purpose was to explore ways to reorganize the departments to reduce organizational burdens on the six departments, and its closure was in part due to an unstable political climate.
SEE TASK FORCE, PAGE 3
AMELIA
NEWS
Professors discuss faculty free speech on campus
LEXI LAWSKY
CONTRIBUTING WRITER
Amid staff layoffs and cuts to the University’s budget, Student Life spoke to a few faculty members about how comfortable they are speaking about administrative decisions. We reached out to seven professors of varying titles and of the three professors who agreed to interview, all were tenured.
All three professors who agreed to interview said that their level of comfort with voicing opinions about the administration can be attributed to their tenure standing.
Professor of History and of African & African American Studies Timothy Parsons has been with the University since 1996. He said that he has seen faculty express discontent with the administration in his time at WashU.
Parsons said that for the most part, it is tenured faculty like himself that speak up.
“You’re always going to run into that level of nervousness in getting junior people to speak,” Parsons said. “My junior colleagues are anxious.”
Rebecca Lester, a tenured professor in the Anthropology department and current Assistant Vice Provost of Faculty Affairs and Diversity, has been at the University for 23 years.
Throughout her time at the University, Lester said she has witnessed faculty members’ continuous calls for more information regarding decisions made by the administration resulting in an increase in transparency.
“We always want more information than we’re getting, but I also understand from the administrative point of view why they are careful with the information that they give out,” Lester said.
Parsons was surprised when WashU cited longerterm financial issues in a message about the current financial state of the University.
“Two, three years ago, we were getting the message that the institution is in incredibly strong financial shape, and now financial constraints are being used as the excuse to lay off hundreds of people,” Parsons said.
Despite what some
professors describe as a surprising financial situation, Lester believes that if anything, transparency has improved over her tenure with the school.
“There’s been so much push from the faculty to show us how the sausage is made,” she said. “It’s gotten more transparent, but I think there’s still quite a ways to go.”
Parsons said that faculty primarily get information on the administration from department chairs, division meetings, the Faculty Senate, and from Student Life.
While WashU officially subscribes to a faculty governance model, Parsons said its implementation is not always consistent and that faculty are not always consulted when major decisions are made.
There are channels through which faculty can express their thoughts on University policy, such as Arts & Sciences faculty meetings run by Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences Feng Sheng Hu. According to Lester, faculty input is valued for the most part.
“I have seen where they have tried to implement a
policy and faculty pushed back against it, and then they changed the policy,” Lester said.
Recently, the College of Arts & Sciences dissolved the task force charged with considering the combination of six academic departments. Dean Hu dissolved the task force due to strong pushback including that of impacted faculty and resignations of faculty on the task force.
Ron Cytron, a computer science and engineering professor in the McKelvey School of Engineering has worked for the University for 34 years, first as an associate professor and later as a tenured professor and at one point, associate chair of the computer science department.
During his time with the University, Cytron has witnessed the tenures of three chancellors.
“All chancellors play their cards fairly close to the chest, for good reason,” Cytron said.
One significant policy change Cytron witnessed and supported was the switch to becoming a need-blind
institution.
“I think [switching to needblind admissions] was a huge step forward for WashU. In fact, when I first arrived at WashU, I asked about that, and I was told ‘to be quiet and eat my spinach, that [the switch] would never happen’.”
Sudden changes from the administration, including recent layoffs, have created confusion among faculty, even among long-serving members like Cytron who have witnessed major transitions in the past.
“There was an advisor I know who got let go, who was doing really, really well. We didn’t get a chance to say goodbye — he was just let go and he was gone, and there was no announcement that he was leaving.”
In contrast, Cytron’s position as a tenured faculty member allows him greater freedom to express discontent.
“I feel fortunate I’ve never had any cause to fear retribution,” Cytron said. “There have been a couple of cases where I’ve disagreed with things the University has
done, and I felt perfectly fine expressing my viewpoint, but I also felt perfectly fine with them saying no.”
One example was Cytron’s disagreement with former provost Beverly Wendland over faculty access to Sumers Recreation Center. Since beginning his tenure at the school, Cytron went most mornings to work out. After the pandemic, however, faculty and staff were prohibited from the center, and although unsuccessful, Cytron advocated for faculty to regain access.
While Cytron feels secure enough in his role to advocate for his beliefs, many other faculty do not.
Compared to staff who teach and non-tenure track professors, tenured professors have the most job security. With unprecedented layoffs and financial challenges, faculty and staff are increasingly concerned about losing their jobs and are more hesitant to share their beliefs, especially when they aren’t sure if they are missing information.
“I have never seen this level of anxiety before at WashU,” Parsons said.
With Teacher Education program set to be discontinued, Class of 2029 and beyond will no longer be able to obtain teacher certification
HOJOON SUNG
RILEY HERRON
CONTRIBUTING WRITER
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Over the summer, WashU announced that it will be discontinuing its teacher education program for all students matriculating in Fall 2025 and beyond. The Teacher Education program, which is housed in the education department but is separate from the more popular Educational Studies major, has struggled with dwindling enrollment and the high cost of hiring adjunct faculty members to teach specialized courses. Current sophomores, juniors, and seniors, however, will be able to finish their studies before the program is eliminated.
The decision comes as WashU navigates financial challenges, including significant cuts to NIH research funding and a $37 million increase to the University’s endowment tax. Despite a number of cost-cutting measures, the University projects a deficit in the upcoming fiscal year. The Teacher Education program was a casualty of the University’s cost-cutting efforts.
“These financial issues hit, and I think the University was looking at which programs are the most successful and so, in a way, our decision was made for us, and we’re sad about it,” said Andrew Butler, professor of education and former chair of the education department.
“At the same time, it does make some sense, right?
The programs were just not thriving in the ways that we would like them to.”
Students were first notified that the program was at risk on April 24, when Michele Augustin, Director of Teacher Education and Academic Services, emailed students enrolled in the teacher certification program, notifying them about a “temporary pause” in the program’s admission of students in the Class of
2027 and future classes.
Four months later, students received another email from Rowhea Elmesky, Director of Undergraduate Studies and associate professor of Education. Elmesky wrote that the pause had been lifted and students already enrolled at WashU could pursue Teacher Education degrees, but that incoming first-years and future students will not have the same opportunity.
“Due to these ongoing challenges and budgetary constraints, the dean’s office communicated a need to discontinue our teacher education programs for students entering WashU in Fall 2025 and beyond,” the email read.
“After much thought and consideration, the department’s Executive Committee voted in favor of supporting the dean’s office.”
As a result, students in the Class of 2028 are the last class able to become nationally teacher-certified as an undergraduate at WashU.
The discontinuation of the teacher education program reflects a broader trend across the nation.
Other universities like Harvard University and the University of Chicago have also ended teacher training programs in recent years.
“As a larger pattern, both nationally and in the state of Missouri, there have been less people interested in coming into the teaching profession,” Butler said.
“When I started as chair in 2019, our numbers had been dwindling.”
Butler said the department had tried a variety of methods to increase enrollment and reduce costs, but ultimately, nothing led to sustainable change.
“We were able to do a lot of things behind the scenes to defer the costs for students, but we could not advertise that,” Butler said.
“And so, if you’re going to go be a teacher, why would you look at WashU, even if you thought you
could get a great education, why would you pay six times what you would pay at another school to be certified and become a teacher?”
Vice Dean Andrew Brown shared that the College of Arts & Sciences implemented a new policy over the summer requiring all courses that consistently have under five students to receive approval from the dean’s office. He added that many teacher certification courses were under-enrolled, with some having as few as two students, and that the University often had to hire specialized adjunct professors and staff members to support a program with very few students. As the University was looking to cut costs, it concluded that continuing the teacher certification program didn’t make financial sense.
“It really came down to a situation where we have to justify the enrollments that we have in our classes, the fact that there isn’t enough student interest to be able to maintain it, and the kind of high staff requirement on top of that. That was where we ended up at,” Brown said.
Senior and Middle School Education major Clay Kain said that despite the challenges facing the program, the decision came as a surprise to students.
“I was surprised. I understood the politics and the things going on, so I guess I kind of knew it was a possibility, but there didn’t really seem to be a lot of communication ahead of time that [the program] would even be at risk,” he said.
Kain added that the move was especially “disappointing” because many students don’t choose to enter WashU as Education majors but join the program later in their studies. Future WashU students looking to switch to teaching won’t have the same opportunity.
Senior Melissa
Parkinson, for example, said she applied to WashU with an interest in its Environmental Science and Political Science programs. She was hesitant about a career path in environmentalism, however, and enrolled in the Teacher Education program. Now she hopes to teach classes like Earth Science and AP Environmental Science after graduating from WashU this spring.
“I saw education as a glimmer of hope,” she said. “At the very least, I can impact the lives of 20 students who walk into my class, and even if they don’t become scientists themselves, I kind of get to meet them at their most impressionable stage in life.”
Without teacher certification, WashU students interested in becoming teachers will need to be certified through graduate school or programs like Teach for America. WashU can still support those on track to become a teacher through alternative graduate programs, like Teach St. Louis, held through the School of Continuing and Professional Studies (CAPS), but WashU will no longer offer teacher certification through a traditional undergraduate or graduate program. Additionally, students can still choose to declare
a major or minor in Educational Studies, a program that is more focused on theory.
“[In] Educational Studies, you’re learning more about the discipline of education from a disciplinary perspective, like looking at the history, the politics, the sociology of education, versus teacher certification, where you’re actually getting the pedagogical tools that you need to be able to teach in your content area or in elementary education,” Augustin said.
Augustin reassured students that the department was still there to help students considering Education by informing them of postgraduation pathways. Augustin said she was also focusing on how to increase enrollment for Educational Studies classes.
“I am looking at ways to reduce the number of courses we need to offer each semester by offering certain courses only in the fall or only in the spring, so that we can beef up those numbers of students who need to take those courses,” Augustin said.
“Also, we’re looking at how we can use our full-time faculty who have expertise in the different areas that lead to certification to take over teaching [Educational Studies] courses, as
opposed to having to hire adjuncts to teach them.” While upperclassmen currently enrolled in the major will be able to complete their studies, they are still being impacted by the decision. Sophomores and juniors faced a period of uncertainty over the summer during the temporary pause, before finding out they would indeed be able to complete the program as planned. As the University prepares for the elimination of the program in 2029, Kain said that students are already starting to feel the effects.
“There’s definitely impacts within the program that are affecting us now that are a result of all the changes that are happening to it,” he said.
Parkinson also said she wished there had been more transparency. She said that administrators have cited financial factors, but shared little additional information about the reasoning behind the move.
“Maybe because of that lack of transparency, it also feels a little bit like a shift in values, and that fact feels sad, because as an Education major and as someone who cares a lot about the future of education, I wish it were something that were more valued … to [the point] where the degree program would stay.”
Senior Melissa Parkinson student-teaches a middle school science class. (Faces of students blurred for privacy.)
PHOTO COURTESY OF MELISSA PARKINSON
1
“This decision was made after close consultation with the task force members and based on valuable feedback from a number of faculty and students, as well as a rapidly changing political landscape that made it difficult to focus on our overarching goals: reducing administrative burdens and exploring increased opportunities for operational and intellectual collaboration,” Hu wrote.
While there are no plans to restart the task force at the moment, Parikh noted that Hu reserves the right to reconvene the task force at any time. Hu still hopes to address issues that the task force was created to review, such as administrative burdens, but in different ways.
“I remain committed to addressing these critical issues, which have a direct impact on faculty members’ capacities for teaching and research,” Hu wrote. “I would like to thank the members of the task force, who worked in good faith under challenging circumstances to engage faculty, students, and staff.”
Stephanie Kirk, Director of the Center for the Humanities and the other task force co-chair, said that efforts to increase academic cooperation between the departments may continue.
“The idea in general is to see if the departments can
from page 1
Student Life published an opinion piece on Oct. 4, 2024 detailing the stories of three of the six students who were precluded from accessing WashU housing and their meal plans for the duration of their suspension.
The new protocol, presented by Associate Vice Chancellor Rob Wild, sophomore SU Executive Vice President Asher Lubin, and senior SU Vice President of Programming Beni Bisimwa, offered the refunding of unused Bear Bucks, a family consultation regarding the student’s future, temporary housing options, and counseling or other mental health resources.
During the presentation, Wild discussed the possibility of having students live in homeless shelters during their suspension if no other options are available.
Senator and sophomore Casey Preis wondered how long it would take after suspension for students to get access to these resources. Preis was concerned how students who cannot afford temporary housing will finance a place to stay before WashU resources are offered.
Wild then asked Preis if the Taylor Family Center for Student Success, a University-run center to aid
address some of their administrative challenges through collaboration, as well as looking to see if there are some interesting and innovative intellectual initiatives that might emerge among some of these units,” Kirk wrote in an email to Student Life.
Parikh added that the political context complicated the committee’s work.
“The broader political climate, including national attacks on fields like Black Studies, Women’s Studies, and Education, made the timing of the initiative deeply concerning from the start,” Parikh wrote. “The political context added to the perception that this process was reactive rather than strategic.”
The creation of the task force prompted criticism from a number of faculty, staff, and students.
One student, junior Ian Gomez, began speaking with students and faculty in the affected departments after learning of the task force’s creation. Gomez, a Germanic Languages and Global Studies double major with a concentration in International Affairs, described “extreme confusion” among those he spoke with both about the news of the potential merger, which came as a surprise, and the selection of the six
low-income and limitedincome students, could provide funds for housing. These funds, according to Preis, are not substantial enough to support temporary housing.
The meeting also discussed the new masking policy, which states the following:
“Any individual who is present on Washington University property, in a University facility, or attending a University function who is wearing a mask or other article substantially covering their face with the purpose of concealing the identity of the wearer, must present an identification document when requested by an authorized University official, or otherwise establish their identity in a manner suitable to the authorized official.”
Senator and junior Wyatt Fox said the aforementioned policy doesn’t explicitly state a ban on masks.
“I noticed that the policy never actually forbids wearing a mask anywhere,” Fox said. “I don’t know if that was intentional or not.”
Preis also wanted further clarity on the language of the policy.
departments specifically.
However, Gomez was impressed with the GS department’s efforts to organize listening sessions to gather feedback as well as the willingness of faculty and students to speak with him.
“I think that this experience has shown me just the strength of our community as a whole, and that’s a resource that really can’t be valued — you can’t put
“What would happen if you were found to be wearing a mask and it’s not for medical reasons? And then also who is enforcing this?” Preis said. “It says authorized University officials, but I don’t know who that is.”
Preis was concerned over how students would prove that they are wearing masks for medical reasons. Beyond proving medical reasons for wearing a mask, Broome questioned what is considered a medical reason.
“What if I’m feeling a little under the weather? Is that a medical purpose? What if I have a pimple or something? Does that count as a medical purpose?” Broome said.
Senior and SU Vice President of Engagement Ella Scott echoed a similar sentiment.
“I’m just confused on what the process looks [to determine] if a person is wearing a mask because they’re sick [or] because of their purpose of trying to conceal their identity,” Scott said. “I think that’s incredibly subjective.”
Outside of concerns regarding the scope of the policy, junior and senator Saara Engineer was worried this policy would continue to perpetuate a history of
a number on that,” Gomez said.
Gomez said that he sees the decision to end the task force as the start of a conversation about the future of humanities education and administrative transparency.
“I think that this is the beginning of a much longer conversation about the future of Arts & Sciences … and how we are going to support our departments
prejudice and inequality for students of color.
“Historically, anti-mask laws passed around the country have been used to criminalize protests and this gives administrators and campus police discretion over acceptable masking, which would invite racial profiling, and that could
and students,” Gomez said.
“It also invites a conversation about how to maintain lines of communication and ensure that people know the information they need to know when they need to know it.”
Parikh emphasized that the uncertainty surrounding the task force made it challenging for it to achieve its stated goals of reducing administrative burdens
be very dangerous for students,” Engineer said.
During the questioning, Wild maintained that there was a need for this policy.
“This came from the board that interviewed a lot of people,” Wild said.
on the departments and strengthening their visibility.
“The level of confusion and anxiety surrounding the task force’s charge made it clear that the process needed to be stopped, and that the issues that the dean sought to address … should be approached in a different way,” Parikh wrote. “The decision demonstrates the value of student and faculty engagement.”
“I think there is some view in the community that was shared with the board that we should consider a policy related to masking.”
To senior and SU President Ashton Lee, the masking policy presented at the meeting runs counter to what WashU should be doing in this charged moment for freedom of speech on college campuses.
Hall.
Lost (and found) in translation: A chronicle from ‘Hélène’s Dreams’ rehearsal
MATÍAS ACEVEDO
GUTIÉRREZ
I arrived with the noble journalistic ambition of not getting in the way. My plan was to write a short chronicle about the penultimate rehearsal of “Hélène’s Dreams,” a play written, translated, and directed by playwright and journalist Amira-Géhanne Khalfallah, a current Ph.D. candidate in Comparative Literature at WashU. “Hélène’s Dreams” tells the story of Hélène, who, after a stroke, begins speaking another language. Her husband, desperate to communicate with her again, hires a translator.
I was there 20 minutes early, and I chatted with one of the actors, Michael A. Harding, associate professor of theater at Lindenwood University, about the project.
“‘Hélène’s Dreams’ is about translation,” Harding said, “about the encounter and the missed encounter between languages.”
We spoke as the rest of the cast filtered into Hurst Lounge. Khalfallah introduced me to the cast.
“This is Matías. We’d met at the doctoral student picnic a couple of weeks ago,” she said, as if that explained why I was there.
“He’s studying theatre,” she added, and an “aaah” of understanding rumbled
through the room.
“Matías is interested in the making of theatre productions and told me he’d like to see our work.”
“Maybe I’ll write a little something,” I said, trying to legitimize my presence. I settled into a corner, laptop on my lap, unaware that my discreet role as observer was about to take an unexpected turn.
That afternoon, one of the actresses in the chorus — the one who provided the Arabic voice — was absent. After a brief,
help but feel that my talent had finally been discovered. The goddess of the stage is capricious. As always, curiosity triumphed over shyness.
Brief digression on Chilean Spanish. There’s an old meme among Spanish speakers that no one can understand Chileans when we talk. And there’s some truth to that. We speak fast, chop off words, skip sounds, and use hundreds of slang terms — all wrapped in an accent that, they say, sounds like we’re singing. Although I cherish my Spanish, maybe
Chilean Spanish.
In this play, everything is a translation. Not only is the script itself translated from French to English, but, as in any theatrical production, the printed word is translated into the vibration of voice and the disposition of the actor’s body. And there I was, experiencing the process firsthand.
The chorus of the play is a modern Tower of Babel — a sonic mosaic composed of speakers of Korean, Italian, French, German, and Arabic — and, on that day, Spanish. At the time, I didn’t realize it,
a disorienting yet strangely beautiful cacophony — meant not to be understood, but to become part of a richer sonic texture. Around me, the rehearsal buzzed with energy: constant corrections, interpretative adjustments, negotiations of tone and nuance. It was communication and miscommunication unfolding in real time.
The director’s artistic vision, too, was a language that needed to be translated into the physical grammar of the stage. The ensemble’s discussions were attempts to find the right bodily “synonyms” for abstract ideas. After my
I arrived with the noble journalistic ambition of not getting in the way.
stress enough how brief it was), the director’s eyes landed on me.
“Could you replace her for the rehearsal?” Khalfallah asked.
“My Arabic is terrible, mostly because I don’t speak it,” I replied.
“But you can speak Spanish,” she said. The fact is, I’m Chilean, so I kinda speak Spanish — despite what the rest of the Spanish speakers may think. Besides, I’ve always had an actor’s calling, and I couldn’t
such a chord with me. My Peruvian friends, with their crystalclear Spanish cadence; my dear Colombians, owners of the sweetest accent in the language, and Argentinians, Mexicans, Spaniards, and Uruguayans have more than once looked at me like someone trying to read the last line of an eyechart, as if they were hearing me blurrily, as if I was speaking another language. #IAmHélène #WeAreAllHélène. End of the brief digression on
the missing actress, it had also embodied the very thesis of the play: from time to time, we find ourselves before a language we cannot decipher. The chorus actors had to contend not only with my onstage “talent,” but also with the total bewilderment provoked by my Spanish — unexpected, yet suddenly present among them.
My participation was a direct plunge into the play’s layering of sounds and ideas. My Spanish voice merged with the others in
brief appearance, I returned to the corner — this time near the door, just in case — as an observer, but with eyes and ears recalibrated. Languages are living entities, with bodies, textures, and temperatures of their own.
The beauty of a multilingual play like “Hélène’s Dreams” lies as much in what we understand as in what eludes us, in the mystery of a sonority that reaches our senses, though not always our comprehension. Instead of asking what
it means, we could ask what voltereta feels like, or frutti di mare, or chuchoter
As I watched the rest of the rehearsal, I couldn’t stop thinking about the original French text. How can one preserve its musicality? What subtleties are lost in translation and what new ones emerge? What happens to the delicate nuances of words that share meaning but differ so greatly in sound? These are the very questions the play seems to pose repeatedly.
My brief debut on stage offered me a glimpse into the complex themes of this play: translation as a creative act, communication as an imperfect but worthwhile effort, and art as the place where chaos finds order.
On Friday, Aug. 17, I attended the stage reading of “Hélène’s Dreams.” I barely made it in time, and the Women’s Building Formal Lounge was packed. I crawled between the rows of seats, muttering “excuse me” and “thank you” intermittently — what I like to call “the theater walk of shame.” From my seat, I couldn’t see a thing, but this play isn’t about seeing, it’s about listening. And it sounded fantastic. I thought that that was the point: to listen — to truly listen — might be the most intimate act of translation.
This article was originally written in Spanish and later translated into English.
Up in the air: Jugglefest returns after five years
One year ago, in the greenroom of Edison Theatre, then-junior Grant Kaplan and then-firstyear Synoma Perea were approached by an exasperated stage manager and handed an unlabeled black binder and a banner that read “Juggling Club.” The binder came in a tattered bag made of duct tape. Despite modest appearances, what lay inside was a time capsule of the origins of Jugglefest. Before that moment, Jugglefest had been a thing of the past, a distant memory of the WashU Juggling Club, then known as the National Prestigious Society of Collegiate Jugglers (NPSCJ). Postpandemic, the juggling club’s annual events consisted only of learn-tojuggle nights and a Lunar New Year Festival act. However, when Kaplan and Perea were handed this binder, they uncovered the very thing that would bring Jugglefest back to life.
Seventeen years ago, long before many of club’s current members learned to waddle, much less juggle, the binder had been filled with notes, letters, and instructions written by Thom Wall, WashU alum and one of the original founders of Jugglefest. The binder told the story of a club that once helped put St. Louis on the juggling map. In the early 2000s, a handful of students and community members started meeting on campus to toss clubs, rings, and balls in whatever open space they could find. Those informal gatherings grew into a festival, and for
10 years, Jugglefest wasn’t just a student event, but a hub for the broader St. Louis juggling community, linking campus with circus performers, hobbyists, and alumni who had carried their love of the art form far beyond the University. The festival started in 2006 with 50 people across the Midwest, and at its peak in 2010, 250 people attended. However, during the pandemic, the festival quietly disappeared. The old banner and binder sat forgotten somewhere backstage. Until this year.
“After we were given the binder, we were reading through it, and at one point, we looked at each other and immediately thought, ‘We have to bring this back,’” Perea said.
Rebuilding the festival wasn’t just about uncovering old documents, though that binder offered a tangible link to the past. It was also about deciding that a tradition could be reimagined and carried forward.
For Kaplan and Perea, that meant stepping into leadership roles they’d never had and piecing together a festival that hadn’t existed in years.
For Kaplan, the idea of Jugglefest came to life this summer at the International Jugglers’ Association (IJA) Festival in Indiana.
“It was really IJA that started all this,” Kaplan said, expressing how his conversations with Wall and Wall’s partner, Benjamin Domask-Ruh, inspired him to reach out to local alumni and juggling professionals from all over. “If it hadn’t been for [them], I wouldn’t have had the guts to blindly reach out to people.”
For Wall and Jim
PUZZLE PUZZLE
Hendricks, the co-founders of Jugglefest, the prospect of revitalizing the festival brought feelings of excitement.
“When Grant … approached me at this year’s IJA festival about restarting the event, I was delighted,” Wall wrote in a comment to Student Life.
“There is such a long history of juggling and circus … in St. Louis, it just seems right to see it come back.”
Hendricks echoed Wall’s sentiments, adding that the revival of the festival brought an entire community back to life.
“I was excited … a jolt of energy was injected into our juggling community,” Hendricks wrote.
The binder served as an important document for Kaplan and Perea as they planned the festival. Wall had documented how to run meetings, structure workshops, and organize the annual showcase. His careful notes had become a “how-to” manual for the club.
“It was amazing foresight that Thom cared enough and took the time to document key juggling club artifacts,” Hendricks wrote. “When Grant and Synoma [discovered] it, it seemed as if it was inspirational and resonated deeply with them. It was gratifying to experience that they, too, held the deep interest and appreciation of the writings and had interest [in hosting] the festival.”
The alumni’s enthusiasm was immediate. Once Kaplan mentioned bringing the festival back, Wall offered to perform for free. Longtime community members reached out, excited to help revive something they once cherished. By the time the
festival weekend arrived, the Women’s Building was filled with the distinct sound of juggling: the click of clubs, thudding of dropped hoops, the low hum of conversation. Workshops ran for hours, covering everything from prop art to face balancing, hoop tricks, and close-up magic. Although Kaplan described parts of the festival as stressful, he reflected on moments when he was able to take a step back and savor the sense of community he was working to foster.
“At one point during open juggling, I zoned out and looked around, and everyone was just having fun, juggling with people they hadn’t been together with in years,” Kaplan said. “And I realized, this is because of us! We really
turned this into something special, which was nice to think about.”
The revival of Jugglefest wasn’t just about performance; it was also about connection.
“Through [Jugglefest]
I realized there is really a community that knows and loves and respects this kind of thing,” Kaplan said. For both Kaplan and Perea, talking to people at the festival — especially local attendees — was one of the most rewarding parts of the weekend.
For Wall and Hendricks, it was an opportunity to reflect on their legacy.
“It was a joy to help [Grant and Perea],” Wall wrote. “Festivals are a reunion — the kind of thing that keeps a larger community afloat. … I’m thrilled that St. Louis is
back on the map as a place for all of us to meet up and celebrate the art.”
Seventeen years after a handful of students and jugglers gathered on campus to create a group that would eventually evolve into a full-fledged festival, Jugglefest returned not as a recreation of the past, but as a continuation of it. Kaplan and Perea carried the legacy forward, not by repeating it exactly as it was, but by creating something new that honored what came before.
“We all like something that’s kinda ridiculous at heart,” Kaplan said, “but we’re all so passionate about it.”
To see photos and videos from this year’s Jugglefest, check out @washujuggling on Instagram.
Rachel Goldstone
FORUM
Your critique of St. Louis is rooted in classism
LEILANI BILLUPS CONTRIBUTING WRITER
When I tell fellow students that I’m from St. Louis, I often get a look of pity, followed by a game of 21 questions: crime-rates edition. Even better are the reactions when I say I went to school in Ferguson: “Isn’t that place crime-ridden?” and “I feel so bad for you,” or my personal favorite, “Ew, Fergu-Sh*t.”
I hear students criticize St. Louis all the time. Whether making fun of the city as a whole or calling any neighborhood outside of Clayton “ghetto” or “dangerous,” students can be insensitive when it comes to describing the St. Louis area. However, these criticisms are often misguided, sheltered, and classist. If we take a deeper look into the St. Louis region, we can see that St. Louis might not be exactly what these students make it out to be.
The first thing that students point to when discussing crime in St. Louis is the fact that for a time, St. Louis was ranked as having one of the highest homicide rates in the country. This homicide rate however, can be attributed to a statistical quirk: The area considered for this crime statistic only includes the inner
city of St. Louis, which is about 62 square miles and has a population of 290,000 people. The greater St. Louis metropolitan area, including the county, has over 2 million people who are not included in the city’s homicide rate. This makes online statistics misleading, especially when other cities like Chicago, Houston, and Los Angeles include suburban populations in their counts, diluting their homicide rates. While crime stats may look scary, they don’t represent the reality of what it’s like living here.
Even after debunking the common criticisms students have about St. Louis, negative attitudes about the city may still persist. At WashU, affluence comes face-to-face with poverty. Twenty-two percent of students here are part of the top 1% of median family income, while the poverty rate in the surrounding area of St. Louis is 18.5%. This poverty that students encounter may cause them to turn their noses up, but the conditions of St. Louis are due to a deep history that must be understood, not judged.
In 1877, St. Louis split in two, making St. Louis City and St. Louis County two separate government entities. This is known as the “Great
Divorce” and consequently created drastic economic differences between the city and the county. These economic differences were then exacerbated by the intentional segregation of the region via redlining policies that aimed to prevent Black St. Louisans from living in white neighborhoods.
The best example of this is only one mile off campus.
The Delmar Divide is an invisible line separating the wealthy and white area south of Delmar from the poor and Black area north of Delmar. This intentional separation of neighborhoods has led to stark economic differences you can see by just walking one block over. Multi-million dollar mansions and bustling streets filled with restaurants coincide with abandoned buildings and food deserts. The poverty surrounding campus, poverty in which students point their judgmental finger, are a direct result of these racist policies. To dismiss the poverty and struggle of St. Louis as some sort of moral or personal failure trivializes the long history this city has faced.
It may be hard to impress students coming from cities with gorgeous skylines and glamorous downtown streets,
but St. Louis has so much to offer. Free attractions, large-scale greenspaces, and developing nightlife can be found all over the STL area, not far from WashU. Students look down on the abandoned buildings and empty streets they see around the city and don’t take time to engage with all that the city is.
Whether you love every last museum and restaurant that lines the streets of St. Louis or think that it’s a sad excuse for a city, one thing is true for all of us: we chose to be here. When you commit to a college, you commit to live in the city that it resides in, and choosing to live in a state of sheltered privilege won’t make your college experience nearly as fulfilling. St. Louis remains resilient despite its history. Spend less time making snide comments about the city you live in and more time appreciating the fact that after decades of struggle, St. Louis continues to push forward and be a great place for all of us to live.
From conservatism to semi-liberalism: WashU through the eyes of a Miamian
“I know Florida is red, but I thought Miami would be blue,” my roommate said, after I told her I was still adjusting to WashU’s political climate four weeks into my first year.
As someone who grew up surrounded by conservatism, WashU is the most liberal institution I have stepped foot in. I am sure that anyone who grew up in a conservative environment would be inclined to agree.
In the state of Florida, under a near constant wave of heat and rain, resides my hometown, Miami. Political conversations often start with cafecito y pastelitos de guayaba (coffee and guava pastries), the kind of fuel that keeps conversations going long after plates have been emptied. At every family dinner, once the dominoes are tucked away and the cafecito cups are refilled, political conversations start to fill the room again. I hear the same words repeated over and over with the same intensity: “We came here to escape communism — don’t forget that.”
Surrounded by heads adorned in red MAGA hats and horror stories of Cuban totalitarianism, I grew up
thinking that conservatism was the only acceptable perspective — a mindset deeply rooted in Miami’s Cuban American community. In fact, a 2020 Pew Research Center survey found that Cuban Americans remain among the most reliably Republicanleaning Latino groups in the U.S., a reality that mirrors the conversations at home. It is almost unthinkable that some people divert from the conservative majority, and those who do (even if they are slightly left-leaning) are deemed communists. It wasn’t until late middle school that I started to question the beliefs I grew up with. Being an Orthodox Christian taught me to love my neighbor and seek justice for the oppressed — values that often clashed with the political ideas I heard around me. That realization sparked my interest in law, leading me to work with my local representative on immigration issues and help immigrants navigate an unfair system. Once I began speaking out about my evolving views, my family often dismissed my opinions at the dinner table, branding me as one of the many “brainwashed by liberal propaganda.”
When I first arrived at WashU, I felt out of place, but over time I’ve realized the
discomfort was productive. I began to listen with curiosity in my political science classes and late-night dorm conversations. Some evenings, I have casual conversations on abortion and gun rights, hearing different perspectives from the ones I grew up with. On others, I attend discussion-based events sharing these perspectives, such as one where a panel argued for DEI in higher learning institutions like WashU. With over 450 student organizations — including bipartisan and issue-based groups like College Democrats, College Republicans, and the Washington University Political Review — WashU encourages open debate across ideologies.
This exposure hasn’t turned me fully liberal, but it has taught me the value of nuance. I still hold onto the lessons I grew up with — the importance of personal responsibility, hard work, and freedom of choice — but I’ve learned those values can coexist with empathy and collective care. I now support policies often associated with the left: a stronger social safety net to protect vulnerable communities, sensible environmental regulations to safeguard our planet, and immigration reforms that treat newcomers with dignity and
First
Second
Third Place:
humanity.
Today, I describe myself as “independent, left-leaning.” I’ve always resisted aligning with a single party and I used to feel the need to defend that stance, as if neutrality made me naïve or indecisive. However, that middle ground isn’t about indecision; it is about choosing to engage issue by issue, and being guided by compassion, evidence, and practicality.
Now, as I walk across campus, the memory of cafecito reminds me that every person’s perspective is rooted in a story that deserves to be heard. Stepping outside my ideological bubble has changed me. At WashU, I have been pushed to challenge my assumptions, with my Miami roots keeping me grounded in my family’s story of exile and struggle.
Combining both is what has made me who I am today.
To students arriving at WashU, or leaving it for homes with different political environments, my advice is simple: Lean into the discomfort of listening. The hard conversations we avoid are often the ones that teach us the most. Political identity isn’t a fixed label we must carry; it is a reflection of many communities and experiences that shape us.
Scan the QR code to enter your submission by noon on Tuesday.
Standing with the Indiana Daily Student and student journalists nationwide
Last week, administrators at Indiana University told their school-sponsored student newspaper, the Indiana Daily Student (IDS), that an upcoming edition could only include special content related to the university’s homecoming. No other regular news coverage was allowed. After the IDS’s faculty advisor spoke up for students against the directive, Indiana fired him. As the IDS students continued to ask for the ability to freely publish their regular content, university administrators fully cut the newspaper’s print editions.
As the editorial board of an independent student newspaper, we cannot stand by as the voices of our peers are silenced. Censorship of the free press is never acceptable.
What makes the news out of Indiana even more alarming is that this is just the latest move in a series of attacks on journalism from people in positions of power across the country. Over the past year, while student journalists have faced fear of deportation, doxxing, and general anti-free press sentiment, the country has watched the federal government carry out similar policies meant to silence dissent and restrict press freedom on a national level.
Amidst these circumstances, Student Life, alongside 54 other student news organizations, signed on to an amicus brief in a lawsuit filed by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, the Stanford Daily, and two other individuals. The amicus brief — a legal document written by outside organizations to provide information and perspective to the court — was filed by a Student Press Law Center-led coalition. The lawsuit challenges the use of immigration law to punish international students for constitutionally protected speech. They emphasized the importance of student newspapers featuring diverse perspectives and the impacts of the Trump administration’s suppression of freedom of speech.
This lawsuit is imperative to advocating for student voices and the freedom of the press. As the brief writes, “the stakes for student journalism, journalism education, and the democratic values underlying those pursuits could hardly be higher.”
The Trump administration’s treatment of international students — including students at WashU — has created a chilling effect on free expression, posing unprecedented threats to the
well-being of international student journalists. In March, Tufts University student Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish national, was arrested after publishing an op-ed in the Tufts Daily criticizing the university’s response to the war in Gaza. In the following months, student journalists across the country have felt unsafe sharing their opinions or reporting on campus events out of fear of retribution.
At WashU, 11 international students faced visa revocations last spring. We have heard from international students unwilling to contribute to Student Life on-the-record as a result of the Trump administration’s actions and the looming threats of visa revocation or deportation.
Unfortunately, student news outlets are not the only ones facing threats to the independence of the press. In recent months, the Trump administration has taken steps to specifically hinder the ability of national organizations to freely report the news. After journalists from almost every major news outlet refused to sign on to new rules created by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to restrict reporting, the Pentagon rescinded their press access. Over the
Time to hand WashU’s identity crisis off to D-I football
DEAGAN PASQUALETTO
As of Oct. 20, 2025, the Vanderbilt University football team is ranked No. 10 in all of Division I football. The Commodores are 6-1 on the season and upset No. 20 Louisiana State University last weekend.
For those unfamiliar with college football, around 60 sports writers across the country participate in a poll organized by the Associated Press (AP) to determine the top 25 best football teams. The AP poll, colloquially referred to as “the rankings,” has been the go-to metric for judging teams’ strength since it was expanded to 25 teams in 1989.
Vanderbilt’s recent successes have come as a surprise to many college football fans. Their team has been a bottomfeeder in the Southeastern Conference (SEC) for as long as many fans can remember; aside from this year and the one prior, their last appearance in the regular season rankings was on Oct. 12, 2008. Before that, they showed up in a 1984 poll when there were only 20 teams in the rankings. Vanderbilt, along with the University of Michigan and the University of Notre Dame, is notable because it is ranked in both the U.S. News & World Report’s top 25 national universities and the AP’s top 25. To this, I have a question: if Vanderbilt — a small, academically elite university with less money than WashU — can resurrect its program from the depths of college football hell, why can’t WashU make the jump to Division I (D-I) athletics?
Moving from D-III to D-I will most certainly be more difficult than reviving an already established D-I program, but WashU’s current identity conundrum justifies the costs.
WashU currently suffers from a severe identity crisis. We struggle with brand recognition, have scant memorable traditions, and lack an exciting sports culture altogether.
If our identity weren’t a problem, then Chancellor Andrew D. Martin would not have found it necessary to embark on a rebranding campaign. However, this effort appears to have fallen flat on its face, as WashU has only moved up one spot in the U.S. News
rankings over the past year.
A half-assed rebrand will not be enough to propel us to our place in the sun. To do that, we need to shock the collegiate world and establish a D-I football team.
Schools with competitive D-I programs are among the most recognized brands in all of sports. Think of the University of Alabama, The Ohio State University, and Clemson University. These schools have hundreds of thousands of fans, many of whom never matriculated at them. In fact, many of them are more widely known for their football teams than for their academics. Few forces in American culture rival college football. If WashU wishes to enhance its national profile, it must seize the unrealized opportunities D-I athletics offer.
In fact, a 2007 study found that D-I reclassification could provide lasting institutional benefits, including augmented brand recognition. While the costs are steep, ranging from $5 to $75 million, this initiative would solve the brand problems WashU has grappled with for so long. In 2024, Ohio State’s football team alone grossed $111,646,810 and, in 2023, its athletics department generated $279,549,337. It would be shortsighted to ignore the enormous money-making potential of college sports.
Many might retort by pointing out that the schools I listed are either large state schools or unusually large private institutions, so WashU is in no position to rival them. This may be true, but this does not mean that smaller, private institutions cannot field competitive teams. Stanford, Duke, Northwestern University, and Vanderbilt are all private schools with established D-I athletics programs. In fact, four of the top 10 schools with the most D-I national championships across all sports are small, elite schools. Furthermore, seven of the top 10 are ranked in the top 30 of U.S. News’ national universities rankings. Contrary to people’s intuitions, academically elite universities dominate college athletics.
I anticipate many other objections, such as high cost, stadium location, player
last year, President Donald Trump has sued news outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, CBS News, and ABC News over coverage he takes offense to. The president has also weaponized the Federal Communications Commission to punish outlets like ABC and CBS. This is not normal. It is anti-democratic: a violation of our constitutional rights. A free and independent press is critical to a functioning
recruitment, and administrative indifference. I could explore the intricacies and refute all of these points, but doing so would turn this column into a dissertation. The pith of my argument boils down to this: any worthwhile pursuit admits risk. Building a D-I athletics program from scratch, let alone a football team, is extremely challenging. Yes, the University will have to spend a lot of money. Yes, the program might not see immediate success. Yes, it could take over a decade to establish ourselves as a competitive team.
The payoff from this investment will far exceed the costs. Twenty-five years down the line, students and
democratic society, and the abridgement of the freedom of the press must not be tolerated. Without editorial independence, journalists cannot effectively do their jobs, and people would not be able to stay informed on matters relevant and important to their daily lives.
Journalism exists not to serve those in positions of power, but to serve the community and hold those in power accountable. Whether it be university newspapers
or legacy media, it is imperative that journalists are able to freely report the news without the threat of censorship.
Staff editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of our editorial board mem bers. The editorial board operates independently of our newsroom and includes members of the senior staff.
You can see who signed on at Studlife.com/forum.
In defense of D-III
status, explains why some say WashU lacks identity.
“Let’s go, Bears!” echoes across the courts. “Here we go, WashU!” says one teammate to another; “Yeah, Bears!” comes the response. If you happened to walk by Tao Tennis Center on Sunday, Sept. 21, you likely heard these chants as the women’s tennis team cheered each other on in their ITA Regional tournament. As a first-year on this team, I was shocked when I heard the accusation that WashU lacks spirit and an athletic identity. From my experience on the team, WashU Women’s Tennis has an identity — during our matches this fall,
alumni alike will thank the current administration for creating something so integral to WashU’s identity. We cannot live in our fears — in the pursuit of prestige, we must strive for greatness and accept the risks it entails.
Great universities are defined not only by their classrooms but also by the traditions they create. WashU has the brains and the resources, but what it lacks is the unifying and invigorating force of big-time athletics. We can continue to tinker with logos and watch peer institutions rise above us, or we can begin carving a tradition that will be ingrained in WashU’s identity for generations to come. To Chancellor Martin, the board of trustees, and any student who cares about WashU’s future: acting sooner rather than later will get us into the polls quicker. Tradition cannot be fabricated; it must be earned. It’s about time WashU earns one.
WashU was the loudest, most supportive team out there each time.
It’s true, though, that when I looked around during our matches this fall, the bleachers were almost always empty. Although we as a team identify strongly with WashU athletics, the student community missed available opportunities to experience our school’s identity. So I generally understand why proponents of Division I sports say that we should start on a journey to bring fans and followers to our athletic programs.
The idea that WashU specifically needs D-I sports to build a stronger WashU identity is misguided — D-I sports won’t change anything unless there is a serious culture change at this school when it comes to supporting our teams. The absence of school spirit, especially surrounding our women’s sports, more than our Division III
It would make sense to me that the first step in building sports identity at a school would be developing teams that win — something that WashU already does a lot of in Division III. Last year, WashU placed fourth out of 323 schools in the Learfield Directors’ Cup for D-III programs, an annual competition that measures all participating schools’ sports results. This means that WashU, across all our sports programs, does very well in national competition. By transitioning to D-I, there would be a general increase in the level of our athletics due to greater recruiting power from scholarships. However, our competition from fellow D-I schools would be stronger too, so we surely would not be winning any more than we are now. I don’t think advocates for D-I sports are simply envisioning a higher level of, say, volleyball with the proposed D-I sports programs. In a valid way, they imagine a school culture that actually values sports. We already have winning teams in D-III — let’s build from there.
Still, athletic success alone does not automatically translate into actual school spirit, and nowhere is that clearer than the student support for our women’s programs. WashU’s women’s sports are particularly strong. Not only did both women’s tennis and soccer win national championships last year, but women’s volleyball, golf, and cross country are nationally ranked in the top 10 as of Oct. 13. Yet schoolwide spirit surrounding these teams is missing. This points to another factor in what leads people to believe that we don’t have the potential for WashU pride: the conflation of men’s sports success with school identity. Just think about it — the majority of our comparable institutions that have a “better identity” due to their D-I sports are most famous for their men’s athletics: Duke men’s basketball, Vanderbilt men’s football, and Cornell men’s hockey and lacrosse. Indeed, WashU’s supposed identity issue may be rooted
in our society’s tendency to disrespect women’s sports and glorify football above all. If our football team were winning national championships, I’m sure we could all imagine how WashU’s sports culture would feel radically different. To proponents of D-I sports, consider this: do you want D-I sports, or do you just want the football culture that involves heavy day drinking for “fun,” sexist frat banners across campus that pass as spirit, and the student population flocking to watch young men get CTE? That is to say, we should not assume that the identity associated with college football is automatically positive.
As someone who grew up in Ann Arbor, home to the University of Michigan, I’m no stranger to college football for community identity. Still, I truly believe that people are going to look back on our culture’s glorification of American football like we reflect on the Gladiators. Points aside, we can build WashU pride with our current D-III sports without having to replicate the male dominance of American football culture.
In fact, it is harmful to suggest that WashU lacks identity because of our “weak” D-III sports programs when it appears that the complaint is really about the lack of a malecentric sports culture. There is clearly already identity to be found in these teams (including women’s teams!), and changing to D-I sports will not solve our identity problem.
Instead, let’s support our teams that are already competing for national championships. The games, matches, and tournaments are happening, and there’s something to be said for the role of the student body in creating school spirit. We as a student population have to recognize that identity does not just happen because we want it to. It takes effort, inconvenience, and a willingness not to spend one’s entire weekend studying (radical, I know) to create identity through athletics.
The WashU Bears should be more than their label. The identity is earned when we show up.
The WashU women’s soccer team has been nothing short of dominant this season. The reigning national champions have a 13-0-1 record and have not conceded a goal on Francis Field since November of last year. In their first four home games this season, the WashU women’s soccer team has outscored its opponents 21-0. On Sunday, Oct. 19, they added to this streak with a 3-0 win against No. 18 Carnegie Mellon University.
With the win, WashU takes sole possession of first place in the University Athletic Association (UAA) standings ahead of a weekend clash with nationally ranked No. 1 Emory University.
On Sunday, strong winds reaching up to 20 miles per hour created an obst-
WashU got off to an early start when junior midfielder Sophie Viscovich scored the first goal of the day in the fourth minute from an assist by senior forward Ella Koleno. Koleno managed a pass right to Viscovich for a straight shot to the top right of the goal.
The rest of the first half proved to be a tough battle as the Tartans had their fair share of attacks against the Bears’ defense. Sophomore goalkeeper Kassidy Lanthier faced a corner kick followed by a quick shot on goal early in the game. The Tartans managed a couple of more free kicks and shots, but ended the half with only three shots.
“We needed to be efficient with our movements and diligent with our defense, and I thought our team did a really nice job of that today,” head coach Jim Conlon said in a postgame press conference on FloSports. During the second half, the Bears kept up their offensive pressure. Just over five minutes into the half, sophomore Olivia Clemons received and quickly dribbled up the ball from around the 30-yard mark. Her shot reached the bottom left corner of the goal, putting the Bears up 2-0 and giving Clemons her 10th goal of the
Continuing this force, the Bears defense managed a through ball after
RILEY HERRON | EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
a failed attempt by the Tartans offense, which put the ball in perfect scoring position. First-year Heidi Fesler scored the Bears’ third goal in the 71st minute off a strong leading pass from Koleno. This marked Fesler’s fifth goal of the season and Koleno’s ninth assist of the season.
“I think she [Koleno] did a great job being super unselfish,” Viscovich said in a postgame press conference. “Obviously, a goal [wouldn’t] happen if Ella [Koleno] didn’t make the right decision, so that was great on her part.”
With 30 seconds left in the game, Carnegie Mellon sent a corner kick far past the goal. This was their final attempt to get on the board.
The Bears finished with a total of 14 shots on goal, compared to the Tartans’ three. Seven of the Bears shots were on goal, for the Tartans, only two. Lanthier was able to save both attempts by the Tartans, making today’s win her fourth clean sheet.
With a current UAA record of 3-0, the Bears will face a major test against two ranked opponents on Oct. 24 and 26. They’ll first travel to Rochester, New York, to face the No. 21 University of Rochester, whom they beat 2-0 in the 2024 season.
The Bears will stay on the road for a match against No. 1 Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, on Oct. 26. This upcoming weekend’s games present a crucial challenge for the Bears amidst their bid to make program history. If they win against or draw with Rochester, WashU will extend its unbeaten streak to 40 games.
No. 3 men’s soccer defeats Carnegie Mellon to remain perfect in UAA play
WRITERS
Last season, the WashU men’s soccer team won just two games in University Athletic Association (UAA) play. But so far this year, the team is crushing its conference competition, holding sole possession of first place in the conference and boasting three wins against conference opponents in as many games.
“It’s always hard to get three points [a win] in the UAA,” head coach Andrew Bordelon said after the No. 3 WashU men’s soccer team narrowly defeated Carnegie Mellon University 1-0 on Oct. 19. “We played exactly how we wanted to approach this match.”
Despite the close score, the Bears maintained their dominant form for most of the game, leading to their fourth consecutive shutout on this 10-game win streak.
The strength of WashU’s squad was on full display on this brisk and windy Sunday morning. It did not take WashU very long to get on the offensive. Just seven minutes into play, first-year Sebastian Valdes had a blo cked shot on goal, but this did not deter the Bears. Five minutes later, first-year midfielder Daniel Kochen saw an opening and fired a ball past the goalkeeper’s hand into the top left corner of the net.
“There wasn’t too much going on in my head,” Kochen said about the goal. “I was just playing through instinct and wanted to help the team.”
Despite the quick 1-0 lead, the Bears’ offense kept buz zing, controlling possession in the attacking third of the field. WashU had two more scoring opportunities in the first half from juniors Ethan
Wirtschafter and Quentin Gomez, with one shot being saved by the goalie and the other by the crossbar. The Bears went into halftime with only a one-goal advantage, yet a 7-1 overall shot differential.
At the start of the second half, WashU looked to extend its lead, and Carnegie Mellon hoped to tie the game. Both teams were aggressive on offense, but the score remained steady. The Bears were able to get the ball into the box multiple times, but shots by Kochen, first-year Miles Newman, and sophomore Quentin Wallace all missed the net or hit the crossbar yet again. However, the Tartans would not let the Bears cruise to victory. In the final 15 minutes of the matchup, Carnegie Mellon took six corner kicks, leading to some close-range shots. Nonetheless, the WashU defense held strong with junior goalkeeper Cal L Hommedieu making three saves to hold on to the lead.
“[In] the last 15 minutes, it was more back and forth, but we were able to win the duels [we] needed to make sure we
hoping to gain more games in the win column. Now, over halfway through the season, the Bears have proven to do so with an 11-1 record. Kochen is a standout among the newcomers fueling this surge. The Spanish star has scored five goals in 12 matches, including the Bears’ sole goal against Carnegie Mellon.
“It’s definitely been an adjustment for me,” Kochen said about his transition to collegiate-level soccer. “But, honestly, having my team supporting me, the coaches, and a huge support network, that’s helped me.”
The Bears haven’t lost a game since Aug. 31, with their impressive play leading them atop the UAA standings, as they move to 3-0 in conference play with their victory over the Tartans.
WashU has a big week of preparation as it takes to the road to face the University of Rochester and its toughest test yet, the No. 2 Emory University, on Oct. 24 and 26, respectively. The possible top-five matchup against the Eagles has been one to look forward to and will be a battle for the Bears as they prepare for the playoffs. Emory has started 11-0-2 and is third in Division III by goal differential, outscoring opponents 40 to 6. With this intense matchup on the horizon, WashU is taking it one step at a time and focusing on bettering its already high level of
“We just got to think about the next game right now,” Kochen said. “Taking it day by day and training our hardest and improving every day”.
