Orientation week ushers in a new school year for first-year students eager to begin their post-secondary journeys. As these fresh beginnings unfold, a more intricate narrative emerges—one where upper-year orientation leaders play a vital role in guiding newcomers through their first steps on campus.
Claire Millar, ArtSci ’26,became a Gael for Arts and Science Undergraduate Society (ASUS) orientation last year. Based on her experience, Millar highlighted concern and consequences students may face in the absence of confidentiality restrictions. She provides insight into a debate between the importance in maintaining student confidentiality and the need for transparency during the orientation experience.
According to Millar, the AMS—who is responsible for facilitating Faculty Society Orientation—holds strict rules in relation to confidentiality measures orientation leaders must agree to in their contracts.
The Orientation Roundtable (ORT) 2023 Leader Contract, obtained from Millar, states all individuals who agree to be an orientation leader of any faculty “agree not to divulge any information to any other person, entity or organization except with express written permission from a supervisor to do so, or as may be required by law.”
A PDF presentation shared by Jane* with The Journal outlines the media protocol enforced for Gaels, which states they “should not speak to any media personnel! All media personnel will be delt with and addressed by the Head Gael only.” The PDF provides subsequent steps for Gaels to follow when interacting with the media.
Rule one reads, “If a reporter approaches you and asks you a question, regardless of if it seems simple and innocent, or if it is being posed by a friend, politely say that you are not in a position to answer at this time and to a Chair or the Head Gael.”
Such guidelines reflect a broader approach taken by the University about confidentiality.
“The policy on confidentiality with orientation leaders and students who are participating is to follow an ‘up, not out system,’” said Maddie Ronan, AMS orientation roundtable coordinator, in a statement to The Journal.
“This means that with situations brought to orientation leaders by incoming students, which concern the student’s safety, it is the role of the orientation leader to inform [the] ORT Coordinator to ensure that all individuals involved receive the help, attention, and resources applicable to their situation and needs,” Ronan said.
The media silence imposed on orientation leaders creates an inherent tension between maintaining student confidentiality and ensuring transparency about the orientation experience. While confidentiality provides students with a safe space to express their concerns, it also raises questions about the transparency of the orientation process and the University’s ability.
Millar feels these rules are “set for the better.”
“My role and purpose as an orientation leader involved being someone that incoming students could confide in and feel safe around—providing advice and guidance during a vulnerable and scary time of the lives of incoming first years,” Millar said.
The impact of this role does not go unnoticed by first-year students.
“During my time in orientation, I had an amazing experience. […] It was an upbeat, social, and an exciting process that connects students with people in their own year as well as participating upper years,” Ella Majer, ArtSci ’26, said in a statement to The Journal.
Queen’s is infamous for the unique orientation experience it provides for students, from learning the “Cha Gheill” to each student being presented with their own faculty tam. Yet, students like Megan Harris, ArtSci ’25, feel frustrated and confused as to why these rules and restrictions are in place. They believe that concern surrounding media restrictions is mis-directed towards protecting the public perception of the University’s reputation.
“Part of the reason I came to Queen’s was for the orientation— it isn’t transparent if someone is having a poor experience,” Harris said in an interview with The Journal.
For Alex McDonald, ArtSci ’26, their experience with orientation week and orientation overall has been “really positive” and a “great opportunity to foster new connections,” they said in a statement to The Journal.
“I believe that restricting communication of orientation leaders with media will create an environment where students feel silenced or unable to express their genuine experiences, whether positive or negative,” McDonald said.
McDonald highlighted the duality of unrestricted media access for orientation leaders, emphasizing that it’s important for both those who have concerns or negative experiences to have a platform to share their stories, and for leaders with positive experiences to do the same.
“As a student, I believe it’s crucial for all activities at the University should be conducted transparently, which includes allowing students to speak freely with media groups,” McDonald said. “Ultimately, I think preventing students who are orientation leaders from speaking about orientation and orientation week is a misguided policy that should be revised,” they said.
Gaels, or other orientation leaders, not being able to speak to media about their orientation experience is suspicious, McDonald added.
“I just don’t know why they would not be able to talk,” said Brooke Johnston, ArtSci ’28, in an interview with The Journal.
“The stigma surrounding media is present nowadays—even if an individual does not have anything to hide, they still fear of the press, and is not necessarily a good occurrence,” Johnston said.
The strict media policy, though intended to protect student privacy, may inadvertently shield the University from public scrutiny and prevent a balanced view of the orientation experience from emerging.
“[The confidentiality restrictions for orientation leaders] shows more than enough about the school’s values at trying to mitigate bad public relations,” said Andrew Bennett, Comm ’26, in a statement to The Journal.
“When leaders are approached by media, the expectation since 2021 is that they let the AMS ORT Coordinator and the Vice-President, University Affairs know and refer the media outlet to either one of the people who hold those roles,” Ronan said. “The reason for this is to relay consistent information to the media from the people who are the most knowledgeable.”
While the confidentiality policies are designed with good intentions, they have led to emotional challenges for both students and orientation leaders, revealing a more complex reality beneath the surface.
“To me it feels wrong— restricting aspects of speech for certain students is odd of a liberal institution,” said David Emery, ArtSci ’26, in an interview with The Journal.
In an age where a single misstep can lead to widespread backlash on social media, the University’s policies reflect a cautious approach to protecting both students and the institution from potential reputational harm.
“I could see this policy justifiably in place as a safeguard against how hostile media and online culture has become—that is, cancel culture,” Emery said.
Emery believes social media creates an opportunity for a one-off statement to do irreputable damage.
As a now third-year student, Emery explained how first year comes with high expectations, and when first-year students are disappointed, they might criticize Queen’s, regardless of the actual circumstances.
Similarly, Millar acknowledges the dangers social media plays in the importance of confidentiality during orientation.
“Had there not been the rule that us Gaels could not speak to the media about our orientation leader experience as it was happening, there may have been cases where first-year students had their vulnerabilities exposed to the media,” Millar said.
These media-related challenges are not just procedural—they also have tangible emotional consequences, affecting how individuals experience and respond to orientation-related pressures.
“Had media censorship policies not been in place, it would take away from the fact that orientation leaders are supposed to be individuals that first years can feel safe with and confide in,” Millar said.
“The current media policy benefits students by ensuring that the details and information published by the media are consistent with all other Fall Orientation messaging, in effort to create a positive experience for the students,” Ronan said.
As the curtain falls on this year’s orientation, a delicate balance between confidentiality and transparency shapes how the orientation narrative is perceived—where debates about these policies persist throughout the hallowed halls of Queen’s University.
*Name changed due to safety concerns.
Tags
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].
D
The Queen’s Journal attempts to spin these contracts in a negative light (not News, instead a completely biased article). Unfortunately for them, these contracts make complete sense for obvious reasons. Of course, the AMS have the right to mandate Orientation Leaders not speak to the media directly. Nothing is stopping these leaders from voicing their concerns after the contractual period is complete. The week itself is not about the leaders, it’s about the first year experience. It takes 1 irresponsible leader to say something inappropriate to the media during the week and 1 pair of first year eyes to see said comment(s), to sour the entire experience. These contracts are OBVIOUSLY not about silencing voices. They are necessary to maintain the integrity and positive experience meant for our first year students.