As a former Stegner Fellow (2006-2008), I’ve been watching the recent restructuring of the Creative Writing Program with great concern. Since my time at Stanford, the undergraduate writing program has grown and evolved into something truly exceptional. This is largely thanks to the lecturers who, because of their many years in the department, were able to meet students’ needs in deeper ways. I was baffled at the decision to “cycle out” those lecturers. The department has repeatedly said money is not an issue, and long waitlists for classes are well-documented. It made no sense to me that, as Nicholas Jenkins said in his Letter to the Editor on Sept. 10, “last year, there were no openings at all for any Stegner Fellows to become Jones Lecturers.”

Jenkins goes on to say that the changes are meant to return to the “original spirit of the Jones Lectureship,” meaning that those positions will prioritize outgoing Stegners. It’s implied that, in order to have space for those outgoing Stegners, the contracts going forward must be capped at five years.

It’s hard for me to take Jenkins at his word, however. On Aug. 31, I received an email from the Creative Writing Program signed by Jenkins, saying that, as a former Stegner who had never held a Jones Lectureship, I was eligible to apply for one of the four openings in the next hiring cycle. The email encouraged me to share the news with other former, non-Jones Stegners. Opening up those positions to Stegners from long ago is absolutely not true to the “original spirit” Jenkins claims to be invested in. When I applied in 2008, I was not competing with dozen and dozens of former Stegners, many of whom would likely have more than a decade of teaching experience and multiple books published. How could these younger, emerging writers compete with that? (If anyone thinks that established, experienced creative writing teachers wouldn’t apply for limited lectureships, they are unfamiliar with the current academic job market.)

I suppose I must wait longer to hear an explanation from the department that feels logically consistent. It must simply be a coincidence that this plan, as I see it, manages to replace the experienced lecturers who built the program with new experienced lecturers who will have even less power within the department to advocate for their students or to advocate for themselves, thanks to their limited terms.

Stacey Swann was a Stegner Fellow from 2006 to 2008.