To quote this article from the beginning, "Considerable teaching, coaching, evaluating, and documenting should occur before a student media staff member is terminated". This is almost nonexistent at WPRK. There is no teaching, very little coaching, and evaluating is looked at as if you're trying to be a "micro manager". This was the first thing that came to mind from this article. It then goes on to say that "Advisers to college media staffs are governed by an ethical code to act as educators and managers, who discipline staff". We have none of this at WPRK and never would have known that this was a standard until reading this article.
On one hand, some WPRK staff like it how it is, meaning they're not told to do anything, or evaluated on anything from a credible source, so they don't. Should these people be terminated form their volunteer position? Probably not, because they were never advised on media procedure int he first place. I believe that evaluating job performance is essential, especially for the student because it teaches them the culture of what's expected in a real life working environment. WPRK does not have a "teacher" or a "role model" and this is an issue with the productivity in daily operations of an FM radio station.
First, I believe it's important for us to have the proper adviser and leadership before we even start to discuss the reasons of termination. We have a "constitution", but we do not have a "staff/student policy manual", which will give it in writing to each staff member the rules they must follow. This would make the job of termination easier for the GM/adviser. Simple guidelines for "ground for dismissal" as the articles suggests:
1. Too many unexcused absences
2. Poor work ethic
3. Policy violations
I agree that it would be a good thing to implement a "Warning policy". This has been attempted in the past, but no one has ever followed through with it. This would be the job of a GM.adviser of course. No student should have to deal with this.
