NAITSA Executive Council Candidates answer 1 question

Earl’s answer focused on improving quality of life for students. He said he’d prioritized seating and outlets for students. “Some classrooms, there are just no outlets for students to plug their devices into,” he said.

He discussed talking to NAIT Campus Planning to come up with solutions. Earl also mentioned adding more quiet study spaces, like potentially opening classrooms that are not being used.

He also mentioned making sure all of this is communicated to the rest of the EC team. 

Discussion
The panel agreed that Earl was a bit nervous but was still able to share a comprehensive plan.

“Even though he seemed a little nervous, he kept pretty organized and was able to go further with what he meant by improving quality of life for students,” said Alleah.

The panel had concerns about the practicality of adding more outlets in buildings that are already finished and the potential security issues of letting students using empty classrooms. But, they agreed that all of his ideas were realistic and had potential.  

Teaira emphasized creating a space where she can understand what the students want. “I want to make sure that the voices of the students are accurately represented,” she said.

Another priority was advocating for inclusivity, equality and diversity on campus by echoing the voices and representing the campus and all the students on it accurately. To accomplish that, Teaira said she’d talk with students to get a pulse of what they are thinking. She finished by saying she wants everyone to feel heard and seen. 

Discussion
The panel felt that Teaira was well-spoken and confident, though a bit nervous. However, they felt that she didn’t fully answer the question. It didn’t seem like the candidate knew the details of the role, and spoke very generally about her plan. “

She’s talking on a very surface level,” said Kyra. “There’s no real steps to how she’s going to achieve that.”

The panel agreed that she has some good experience as an executive of a club, but they would have liked to see more of an action plan.

Using his student experience and “feedback I’ve heard from friends, classmates, and people I know on campus,” Anubhav’s main goal is to make sure that the EC is in touch with the student voice.

He mentioned that he wants to try his best to meet these needs by continuing the check-in events where students can meet with EC, along with looking into introducing an online model where students can leave feedback for EC.

He hopes that this will allow the EC to be more aligned with what the student body wants. 

Discussion 
His answer wasn’t specific to the VP External role, said Kyra. Danielle and Alleah appreciated that he mentioned the EC, because it’s a good sign that he wants to hold them accountable. “That would be a really good quality to have on a team,” said Danielle.

The panel agreed that he had a good answer for only having one minute to prepare. He is heavily involved on campus, which they said was “very positive,” but they wished he would have mentioned it more in his answer. 

One of Robin’s priorities is student welfare. “That’s why NAITSA’s here, that’s why we’re here, because of the students,” he said. He also emphasized making himself accountable and ensuring he is doing well in his role.

Robin would do the same for the rest of the ECs, so that they can represent NAIT students’ interests in their hearts. If elected, Robin encouraged students to approach him or book an appointment to let their concerns be known at the institutional or governmental level. 

Discussion
The panel felt that Robin didn’t answer the question fully.

“He has a good presence and a good voice, but I really don’t think he said anything that was super important,” said Alleah. They agreed they wanted to see more from Robin, as it didn’t seem he had a full understanding of the role.

However, his background on NAITSA Senate and volunteering at NAIT is something to consider, said Kyra. Based on his article for the Nugget, Alleah felt he had an idea of what students need, but in the video, he didn’t have a way to follow-through on that plan. 

Thien’s priority is the students; he wants to advocate for every voice on campus. He understands students have strong opinions of a varying nature.

He mentioned focusing on emerging problems that may come up in the future, along with ongoing issues in the past. Thien mentioned the U-Pass referendum and how he’s very interested in hearing what students think about it, along with encouraging students to consider their needs and the needs of others.

He also highlighted focusing on satellite campuses so “every NAIT student is heard and seen and represented.” 

Discussion 
The panel felt he spoke well and was very confident, but that parts of his answer weren’t relevant to the question. “I want to know what the issues are and how you’re going to act on those issues,” said Alleah.

The panel appreciated his past experience working for the federal government and his experience working on NAITSA’s Ooks Life Team.

However, Kyra felt that she wasn’t sure what his goal was, or how he would achieve it. “But he does have a persuasive voice, which I think is important in this role,” said Alleah.

Emma highlighted three main points: quality of instruction, consistency of services and no low-cost textbook options. She said her highest priority would be a lack of free or low-cost textbook options for NAIT students.

Using her time at the University of Alberta to inform her plan, Emma said she’d try and give access to things like simulations or quizzes for free on the computers at the library on campus. She also mentioned adding an option when selecting courses to choose classes that have a low-cost textbook option. Emma highlighted the difference in NAIT students’ requirements as something she’d also consider. 

Discussion 
The panel was impressed by Emma’s answer and confidence. Danielle highlighted that she spoke directly to what she included in her article for the Nugget and her reference to prior experience at the U of A.

“She definitely has a plan, she is prepared to take on this role,” said Kyra. Alleah felt that the issue Emma focused on is relevant for students. Danielle had one concern about accessibility, and worried that Emma’s plan may not work for all schools. The panel also highlighted Emma’s experience working at NAITSA’s Service Hub, along with a background in psychology that may help her. 

Fraser’s highest priority is to improve the mentorship programs at NAIT by working with the Business Information Centre and the current mentorship programs run by NAIT.

“I’ll also be using some of my experience as the CPHR Campus Ambassador to NAIT to influence and enhance those mentorship programs,” he said. Fraser highlighted his experience in networking, saying that he has been both a mentor and mentee and will use his experience to build these programs. “[Mentorship] is an education that people will not get from learning in the classroom and books alone,” he said. 

Discussion
Danielle highlighted Fraser’s connections, saying they could be beneficial in the role. The panel did have concerns with the article he wrote for the Nugget, saying that it didn’t feel authentic. Fraser’s video response felt more genuine, but the article had a lot of fluff.

They felt that Fraser has good experience in clubs and volunteering, but they wished that he spent more time discussing how he planned to achieve his goal. The panel had questions about the relevancy of his plan; they wondered how much change he could make in a NAIT-run program.  

Katherine highlighted a few key issues: academic integrity, fair and transparent grading, mental health initiatives related to academics and representation for whatever comes next. She discussed her experience on Academic Council and working with NAIT and NAITSA. “I’ve been in some of the rooms that the VP Academic would need to be in already to accomplish those things,” she said.

Katherine would use her experience in policy and protocol development to collaborate with the necessary people, as she said it’s not always students who have control over policies. “Sometimes it’s the government, or the administration at NAIT,” she said. 

Discussion 
The panel appreciated her prepared answer and knowledge of what needs to be done to achieve goals. But they wished she was more detailed, as her answer was very quick. “Based on how she speaks, it makes me feel confident that she can get things done, but I would have liked to hear more from her,” said Alleah.

Danielle wished Katherine was more specific about which goal she’d prioritize in office. The panel agreed that they were all impressed with her experience in different programs and jobs and felt that would benefit her in the role. 

Her highest priority would be “whatever concerns that students may have.” Salinderjit emphasized that all student concerns are valid. She highlighted her experience on Academic Council, saying that she has listened to concerns and made recommendations while keeping students in her heart.

She would achieve her goal by having open communication with students. “I will always look at my emails or messages on whatever communication channels that we might have,” she said. “I will always consider what the students are asking me.” Salinderjit mentioned that students consider her approachable and that she wants to stay that way if elected. 

Discussion 
The panel felt Salinderjit did not answer the question and that she didn’t present a clear understanding of what students are concerned about. Danielle was concerned about her promise to always answer student emails or messages, as the VPA role can be quite demanding with meetings and commitments.

“It was kind of generic,” said Kyra. “What more are you going to do?” The panel did highlight Salinderjit’s experience volunteering, which would help her feel comfortable talking and listening to students. Her article was very confident and detailed, but they felt her answer in the video did not match that specificity and confidence.

Brayden’s biggest priority would be to hold NAIT accountable. He mentioned that they [the EC] noticed that NAIT pushes students’ needs and issues to the side in their decisions. “They run NAIT like a business, rather than thinking about who their biggest stakeholder is,” he said. “And that’s the students.”

He emphasized issues that NAIT is not considering, like food that fits students’ dietary needs or icy sidewalks. Brayden wants to continue what he’s been doing as VP Internal and lead a team of new VPs, showing guidance that he found helpful as a new VP last year. 

Discussion 

The panel was very impressed with Brayden’s answer. “He truly understands the student body, what’s going on,” said Kyra. They highlighted his experience as VP Internal and how he had a comprehensive list of issues that all students can relate to. The panel agreed that his main priority is relevant and topical.

Danielle appreciated his desire to guide and lead a new team. The panel all agreed that he didn’t explicitly say how he would accomplish this plan but felt that he displayed the confidence necessary to accomplish his goal of holding NAIT accountable.

Lilly thought a lot about what her priority would be before running, and said her platform is built on the reason students do post-secondary: getting good jobs. She wants to promote NAIT students to the business and trade world. “I want to use my platform to be a voice for NAIT students,” she said.

Lilly plans to get into the business and trade world, mentioning organizations and local chambers of commerce. She was drawn to the President role because there is a team who can help her accomplish this, along with helping students have fun in school. 

Discussion 
The panel was concerned that Lilly’s goal was more focused on student well-being after graduation, rather than students when they are in school. The panel wasn’t sure if Lilly had knowledge of NAITSA and what they do for students and wished she had more experience on campus or working with students.

Alleah felt her discussion of maintaining NAIT’s reputation was relevant, as that is something students value, but wondered if this advocacy was already happening. They felt that she spoke very confidently and has potential to be a leader, but she lacked a clear plan.