University President Ellen Granberg in January said GW plans to increase the presence of corporate members on its Board of Trustees. This decisions sends a signal to the GW community that they can expect the Board to prioritize business-driven decisions over the academic enterprise. We’ve already seen this happen over the last year, and I worry what further corporate representation could mean for the future strength of the University’s academic enterprise.

I understand the University has to skillfully manage its investments to keep GW afloat and create new opportunities, especially as we navigate cuts in funding under President Donald Trump’s administration and a yearlong budget deficit. But recent decisions, like selling the Virginia campus and cutting doctoral programs, prioritizing profit over learning and going against values many of our community members hold, signal that the Board is more focused on bolstering GW’s gains than advancing its educational mission. By no means am I arguing that the Board should be void of all corporate influence, as this skillset is crucial for running the University. I understand that the body has a responsibility to prioritize GW’s long-term fiscal health. But the Board already has a substantial number of members from corporate backgrounds, and I fear adding more could tilt the body’s focus away from GW’s academic mission.

Over the past few months, the University has made decisions that do not align with the values of many of its students and faculty members in the name of improving GW’s fiscal health. In January, the University announced that it will be pausing admissions to five Ph.D. programs due to recent fiscal challenges. This may allow the University to save money in the long run, but the decision goes against their stated commitment to research. With less Ph.D. students, and reduced funding to programs, the University’s capacity for research progress is limited, violating the very values that often attract people to this institution.

Another instance of the University making financial decisions at the expense of community member needs occurred when GW sold its Virginia Science and Technology campus to Amazon for data center development. Many community members have expressed their disapproval of this decision, arguing it undermines the University’s sustainability values, and will displace research and educational programs. This decision was made by the Board without input from GW students and faculty, and does not align with the values of many in the community. Appointing members to the Board with a background in education could have prevented a decision that doesn’t align with community values, or at least ensured a more diverse range of perspectives weighed in on the decision.

An increasingly corporate Board of Trustees would amplify the disconnect between GW community members and the administration. Students and faculty already complain about a lack of transparency and accountability from the GW administration. Adding more corporate voices would widen this gap — higher education is a unique field, and it usually takes someone with experience in the field to grasp the full implications of decisions universities make. Corporate focus paints the University as an institution aimed at maximizing profit rather than a space for students, educators and researchers to learn and grow. The decision to structure the Board in such a way communicates that insight from GW’s academic population will not be as strong a factor when making major choices.

To establish a Board of Trustees that truly works for GW students and faculty, the Board should appoint more educational experts. Currently, University decisions are being made by individuals with similar professional — majority corporate — backgrounds. Granberg is the only current voting member with a professional focus in education. Representation of different interests, especially those more closely aligned with the educational sphere, are essential to formulating decisions that benefit more than just economic profit. Furthermore, those with backgrounds in academia have more complete understandings of how universities operate on a daily basis, meaning they can provide essential insight when making decisions that affect campus life. While corporate actors understand how to increase profits, they may inadvertently fail to account for the effects certain decisions will have on the inner workings of the university.

GW must honor its commitments to research, education and sustainability by appointing members of diverse professional backgrounds to the Board, especially those from the education sector. The strength of the university is determined by the well-being and success of its students and faculty. In order to maximize these positive outcomes and commit to previously stated values, the people making major decisions should be representative of the voices of the community.

Willow Harrington, a sophomore majoring in political science and psychology, is an opinions writer.