On Sunday, The Daily reported that Northwestern plans to move toward open admission policies for student groups that use University resources. Brent Turner, the executive director of Campus Life, said this new plan is part of an ongoing quest for greater accessibility. Turner said that beginning some time next year, NU will no longer recognize new organizations that reject students.

This new announcement has generated polarized reactions. Some vehemently oppose the goal. On Monday, columnist Jacob Altstadt wrote that “closed admission allows the organization to screen unfit candidates and maintain an optimal level of talent” and “by banning applications school-wide, the University would cripple the entire worth of its extracurricular life.”

There are also those that are very much in favor of the new goal. A major reason for their support is that open admission would get rid of the current application process used by many exclusive groups. A common process for joining many student groups entails filling out a one- to two-page application and interviewing with a current member of the group.

I believe both reactions are valid. On one hand, forcing student groups to take in anyone and everyone could be detrimental to a cohesive group culture and make it harder to build meaningful relationships among members. On the other hand, the current application process is flawed because it reduces all applicants to their applications and the claims that they make in their interviews.

Embracing open admissions does not mean we have to abandon selective applications. Student groups should use the open admission policy to improve the quality of their core members and leaders. Open admissions would create a large and diverse pool of general members. And by holding events that general members could attend, those with true commitment could distinguish themselves and show their alignment with the student group’s mission. The experience that general members would gain at these events would solidify their reasons for joining and strengthen their applications for core membership and leadership positions.

The idea of having general membership brings up the aforementioned concern that having too many members makes it difficult for all members to build substantial relationships. Building such relationships should not be the purpose of general membership. General membership should be treated as a free trial period. Core membership and the benefits that come with it should still be earned by general members that stand out and take more active roles in the group.

Another concern with the idea of general membership is the potential costs to the student group. If NU is going to mandate that all student groups open their doors to everyone, then the school must commit to drastically increase funding for student groups and further streamline the process for accessing funds.

The bottom line is that NU, as an educational institution, has a responsibility to make learning opportunities accessible to all students. The new open admissions goal should not aim to coddle rejected students. Rather, it should provide a more welcoming and meaningful experience that enriches the college experience of all interested students, even those that do not become group leaders or committee members.

Colin Wang is a Weinberg sophomore. He can be contacted at [email protected]. If you would like to respond publicly to this column, send a Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of all staff members of The Daily Northwestern.