An Instagram notification appears. “@walnutfriendzone” has just followed you. One after another, new clubs start popping up on my social media feed: Curing with Care, Sisters in Service, Lead and Inspire the Youth (LIT Youth) and several more that make up the school’s 100+ clubs. As I scrolled through, I realized that many of these were nothing new; instead, simply variations of long-established clubs.
This school year has seen a significant increase in clubs formed. Scrolling through their profiles and mission statements, I noticed similarities that several new clubs shared with existing clubs on campus. For example, LIT Youth introduced itself as a club aimed to educate and help children of all backgrounds by providing them with the resources they need to have a better education (instagram.com). Meanwhile, UNICEF, a long-standing organization strives to “ensure every child has access to education, food and safety” (unicef.org). We have two new clubs raising cancer awareness and three more clubs teaching students English. This pattern of repetitiveness is being reflected too much. I can keep mentioning more clubs, but the list will just go on. The issue raised now is why people are starting clubs that are merely copies of each other. Are they created to make an impact, or just there to fill up the list of extracurriculars for college applications?
I get it—there’s a lot of pressure to stand out for a higher chance of being accepted into your dream school. We’re in an environment where even having a 4.0 GPA and taking all honors and AP classes won’t cut it; extracurriculars are necessary to bolster your resume and get recognized by colleges and universities. This causes students to veer towards creating new clubs and becoming presidents. However, when trying to create something new, the downside is that those clubs become empty shells; although doing some small activities here and there, the club is only there for the namesake.
Instead of having one club with a united purpose, people are establishing different clubs with the only difference being their club name and an abundance of officer positions. While a lot of students start these clubs with good intentions, they’re making the problem of club redundancy worse. For example, Hearts 4 Health and GHC Youth Coalition are both organizations helping students navigate through different medical careers. American Cancer Society Youth Ambassadors Club and Curing with Care raise awareness for cancer. Cosmetology Club and Project Blush both promote self-care through hygiene and beauty products. Sisters in Service and IgniteHer both focus on women’s empowerment. With the new addition of Distributive Education Clubs of America (DECA), four clubs now share the Career Technical Student Organization (CTSO) fund: Health Occupations Students of America (HOSA), Future Business Leaders of America (FBLA), DECA and Skills USA. This means that each club gets less funding for their members when paying for competition fees. However, FBLA and DECA both offer the same competitive business events. With DECA being similar to FBLA, I don’t see the point of splitting the funds further. If students want to change their school and community, the solution isn’t to make more clubs; it is to gather the effort in one place so the total impact would be larger.
What’s worse are the clubs that are the same as the courses on campus. For example, although badminton is a sport offered, there is still the Badminton Club; I get that the Volleyball Club exists because the school does not offer a boys’ volleyball team, but what was the reason for creating the badminton club? Is it for people who couldn’t make it on the badminton team? With this pattern repeated through so many clubs, it’s hard to believe that every one of them is created solely to make a positive impact on students and the community.
The Associated Student Body (ASB) should place stricter regulations on establishing clubs that have a similar purpose to a pre-existing club. Detailed proposals should be required clearly outlining a club’s mission and differences compared to other clubs on campus. Although the club founders may have admirable missions, repetitive clubs are ultimately redundant with little to no purpose. Currently, ASB conducts semester checks on club hours; however, there needs to be more follow-ups on whether they have consistent meetings and events. I believe that an impact report should be required from each club so that ASB can keep track of performance. This report should be done monthly, with detailed descriptions of club activity, member participation and money raised (if they start fundraisers). If the club proves unsuccessful or inactive, then it should be unchartered. If no action is taken to control the number of clubs created, Walnut is bound to be flooded with dead, repeated clubs.
