This editorial is the first in a two part series outlining the need for an additional student regent.

As we noted yesterday, the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents would be greatly aided by the addition of a second student amongst its ranks. The reasons for this, as we previously scribed, are numerous. But most prominently, a second student regent could aid in better representing the UW System as a whole.

With two student regents, serving staggered terms of two years a piece, one such representative ought always be appointed from a campus other than UW-Madison, while the other should continuously hail from the system’s flagship institution.

While Madison is a valued part of the 26-campus UW System, the needs and interests of those students outside of the beltline are substantially different than those pursuing a higher education in the state capital. Smaller student bodies, varied levels of research funding, different faculty/student ratios, less immediate proximity to urban resources and more directed degree programs are just some of the attributes found at the UW System’s 25 non-Madison campuses. With these differing needs should come differing representation. We recognize that just as Madison is largely unique from all other schools in the system, they are too unique from one another. But they share many primary concerns — surely not limited to those enumerated in this editorial — and would do well to have at least one student from within their collective ranks grace the Board of Regents.

The second student representative must hail from the Madison campus. The only bona fide national university within the system, UW’s flagship school leads the system in research by no small margin, is one of the few doctoral universities in Wisconsin, has one of the largest campuses and student bodies in America, expends far more system resources than any other school and needs constant caring attention.

The beauty of a student regent is the ability to speak directly to the rigors of course work and student life. Given that these experiences are sufficiently unique for those studying in Madison, it seems contrary to the entire notion of representation to not have someone on the board who can speak to these independent experiences from within the system’s flagship school.

Just as a Madison student cannot speak to the uniqueness of Stout, we are confident that an Oshkosh student cannot speak to the uniqueness of Madison. It is for these reasons, in part, that we call on the Board of Regents to welcome a second student into its ranks and take a positive step toward more accurate and fulfilling representation of the system the body is charged with heading.