There is a definite buzz around campus these days about the passing of the College in Prison program here at Wesleyan.  As a proponent of prison abolition and as someone who was once a member of the student group invested in organizing this program, I wanted to bring up some of my concerns. The reasons that I left the group are mostly centered around a fundamental disagreement of what radical prison activism means and the fact that I do not feel that I can responsibly support a program that reinstitutes hierarchy and injustice within the most marginalized and oppressed segment of our society. I am not writing to address those disputes, rather I am writing this Wespeak to encourage dialogue with and demand transparency from a group that has committed to neither.

The criticisms that I wish to discuss in this Wespeak are basic. Over the past four years I have spent at Wesleyan, I have learned that the process is as important as the final result.  That is to say, the way we do things is as relevant and meaningful as the outcome. The foundations of organizations and coalitions often influence their actions far more than is foreseeable at the outset. With this in mind, I would encourage the student body and the faculty at Wesleyan to ask questions about this Wesleyan Center for Prison Education (WCPE) rather than to accept it based on the fact that “prison activism” has become the new code for cutting edge, liberalist social capital. For example, what student group (and which students, specifically) began this Center? What is that student group’s mission statement? What was the process of applying for funding, and where is this money coming from? Are academic departments and programs created from and founded on student activism and radicalism (e.g. AFAM) on board? Were those departments and the professors that lead them consulted and are they currently supportive of WCPE? Who will be the current student(s) that will stay on next year to help run the program? How were they selected/was there an application process? 

Or perhaps we should back up and consider what we even consider to be a student movement. What was the input of the student body? Were you, as a student or professor or staff on this campus, ever asked for input? What are your priorities and how do they align with this program? I am uncomfortable with the lack of outreach to the campus and the overall lack of conversation. The fact that this program began from a grant and was dictated to us is disappointing; it could have begun as a process of intellectual exploration and collective re-envisioning of the function of education.

Before accepting this program I would encourage you to ask the questions that may be on your mind and engage in dialogue about the origins and implications of this program.