When Institute of Politics (IOP) Director Sen. David Pryor announced his plan to dissolve the IOP's Student Advisory Committee (SAC), saying the group had become too insular, many students involved in the IOP said they were confused.

They already knew SAC was in need of change, and they had been working hard for two years to change it.

Students say Pryor's decision came out of the blue for a student group already trying to reform itself.

For over two years, the IOP has been questioning the level of involvement students should have in governing the IOP. A major point of contention had been tension between the group's paid professional staff and its elected student leaders.

Last spring, SAC members told the IOP's senior advisory board that they had a proposal to end the tension--the two groups should simply better outline their working relationship, the SAC members said.

The students suggested allowing undergraduates to have more input into final decision about whether to go forward with programs. They also asked for a professional consultant to be called in to look at the situation.

"It was not at all personal, not against any staff member. It's just that when you have two areas of an organization, one being staff and one being students, it's important to have formal ways of interfacing between two groups," says former SAC member Heather A. Woodruff '03.

But the idea of a consultant was dropped over the summer.