2025 general election: Schulich School of Engineering
Three Schulich School of Engineering students are running for three faculty representatives positions. Along with the responsibilities outlined for all Students’ Legislative Council (SLC) members, faculty representatives are accountable for responsibilities particular to their role including: Reporting to students of their faculty the policies, positions and programs of the Students’ Union (SU), reporting to their faculty itself (like Dean’s Council) the policies, positions and programs of the SU, representing student constituents of their faculty at SLC, representing student constituents of their faculty on university committees and reporting to the VP Academic on matters of academic importance within their faculty.
Fardin Aryan
Fardin Aryan is a fourth year engineering student running for one of three Schulich School of Engineering Representative positions. Aryan did not interview with the Gauntlet, so here is what you can expect solely based on his platform.
Aryan aims to create a Schulich-specific professor rating system that allows students to make informed course selections through “real-time student feedback.”
Currently, the University of Calgary collects student feedback through the Universal Student Ratings of Instruction (USRIs) at the end of each semester. Students can access this data if at least eight students respond and if the number of responses is at least 20 per cent of enrolled students in the class.
Aryan states that professor ratings are outdated, biased and provide minimal feedback. However, it is unclear whether he is referring specifically to USRI data or also to external sites like Rate My Professors.
His second platform point focuses on increasing class sections to avoid overcrowding and provide more options for students. Aryan aims to work with faculty and the SU but does not provide a tangible plan to do so.
Lastly, Aryan aims to provide engineering students more research opportunities, citing a lack of funding and awareness as primary concerns. He aims to work with the SU to “secure more undergraduate research grants” but it is unclear if he aims to advocate to existing funding bodies or if he wants the SU to host the grants themselves.
While Aryan’s platform is within the scope of his role and aims to solve problems within the faculty, more specificity is needed. As a fourth year student, Aryan appears aware of the responsibilities of the role and the challenges faced by students in his faculty and would make an informed representative.
Emmanuel Fasesan
Emmanuel Fasesan is an engineering student running for one of three Schulich School of Engineering Representative positions. He did not interview with the Gauntlet, so this assessment is based solely on his platform.
One of Fasesan’s key proposals is to establish Engineering Advisory Committees to bridge the gap between faculty and industry professionals. However, this initiative appears redundant, as the Schulich Industry Advisory Council already serves this function.
“This council of engineering leaders provides the faculty with strategic advice and support on its programs. Members also help Schulich determine its future direction,” states the University of Calgary’s website.
Additionally, Fasesan’s push for clearer cost breakdowns and transparency aligns more with the responsibilities of vice presidents rather than a faculty representative. While he could advocate for these issues, they largely fall outside the scope of the role he is seeking.
With a platform that lacks originality and misdirects priorities, Fasesan’s candidacy raises questions about his suitability for the position.
Ibad Rehman
Ibad Rehman’s platform presents a reasonable understanding of student concerns, focusing on AI-related academic penalties, specialization guidance and co-op awareness within the Schulich School of Engineering. While his ideas address real issues, some aspects of his platform lack depth or feasibility.
His stance on AI penalties is relevant. However, while he can push for student concerns to be heard, his ability to influence policy directly is limited and falls within the scope of the Vice-President Academic role.
His second major point — improving the specialization selection process within engineering — addresses a genuine gap. While Schulich already offers career fairs and industry events, his call for more field visits is a practical and achievable goal.
Finally, his focus on increasing awareness of co-op programs is well-intentioned but somewhat redundant. The Schulich School of Engineering already has dedicated co-op resources and a clearer strategy would strengthen this part of his platform.
Overall, Rehman’s platform identifies key student concerns and has some understanding of the steps needed to address them, but we were unable to understand his platform in depth due to a lack of an interview.
All undergraduate students in the Schulich School of Engineering can vote YES or NO on their ballot for up to two candidates for FACULTY REPRESENTATIVE or ABSTAIN from voting.