From owner-grads@po.cwru.edu Wed Oct 6 14:17:44 1999 Return-Path: Received: from cornelius.INS.CWRU.Edu (majord@cornelius.INS.CWRU.Edu [129.22.8.216]) by fafnir.astr.cwru.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26970 for ; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:17:44 -0400 Received: (majord@localhost) by cornelius.INS.CWRU.Edu (8.8.8+cwru/CWRU-3.6) id OAA07683; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:17:35 -0400 (EDT) (from owner-grads@po.cwru.edu for grads-out) X-Authentication-Warning: cornelius.INS.CWRU.Edu: majord set sender to owner-grads@po.cwru.edu using -f Received: from imo-d09.mx.aol.com (imo-d09.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.41]) by cornelius.INS.CWRU.Edu with ESMTP (8.8.8+cwru/CWRU-3.6) id OAA07674; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:17:32 -0400 (EDT) (from RJCharn2@aol.com for ) From: RJCharn2@aol.com Received: from RJCharn2@aol.com by imo-d09.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v22.4.) id 3GSL0nBzwy (4573) for ; Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:16:56 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <8324ab85.252cec18@aol.com> Date: Wed, 6 Oct 1999 14:16:56 EDT Subject: Meeting Report: 6 October 1999 To: grads@po.cwru.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 27 Sender: owner-grads@po.cwru.edu Precedence: bulk Status: ROr Items: ( I ) Meeting Report: 6 October 1999 ( II ) Plus/minus ad hoc committee ( III ) Attendance and quorum concerns ( I ) Meeting Report: 6 October 1999 Attendance: Rich Charnigo Dan Kerr Tracy Williams Denise Rafferty Laurie McFarland Adam Majewski John Martin Colleen Tagliarino Tom Hund Tina Smith Raja Ghanem Dean Eisen also came for part of the meeting. A variety of items came up at today's meeting. The 29 October inauguration of President Auston was announced, and invitations will be forthcoming. Tom Hund presented a budget for this year, which received approval from all present. [Since quorum was not achieved, formal votes on all issues have to be done by electronic mail this week, but it is clear that all such items are likely to be approved.] There were five applications and five awards for the V-fund this summer, totalling $548.37. Applications for fall semester V-fund awards are due on 1 November, and fliers were given to senators for posting/distribution in their respective departments. Plus/minus grading was discussed. Advocates on both sides of the issue spoke up. However, if plus/minus grading is going to be approved (which seems likely), the GSS should try to propose ideas and solutions to mitigate any negative effects there may be. [This is my view, which was also expressed by Dan Kerr.] Tom Hund and I have been given charge to form an ad hoc committee on the matter; see ( II ) below. Pending the formal vote, there will also be an ad hoc committee regarding modification of the constitution and bylaws of the GSS. Support for reexamining the constitution was not unanimous, however. Three student groups were recognized by the GSS, and the History Graduate Student Association will receive provisional recognition for this year. This organization had to ask for special consideration because it does not have a faculty advisor; support for recognition (with limited benefits) was unanimous. Tom Hund mentioned that we will have two participants at the NAPGS conference, which will be held from 18 to 21 November in Columbus, Ohio. A food drive event is upcoming, and Tom will provide details later. Dan Kerr discussed the results of the graduate student funding survey. He perceived a discrepancy in the competitiveness of graduate funding based on the general area of study, and a GSS resolution may be forthcoming at a future meeting; concerns expressed (by various people) were that the stipends were insufficient for living expenses, some awards were taxed which perhaps should not be, job prospects were limited, and health care provisions needed to be made. At the conclusion of the meeting, which lasted about one hour, Dean Eisen announced that she would be leaving her position at CWRU and moving to Boston. A vigil against hate crimes and violence is reportedly scheduled for tomorrow night. ( II ) Plus / minus ad hoc committee I am told that university undergraduate faculty will be discussing this issue tomorrow, and also that the undergraduate student government will be holding a rally in opposition to the adoption of plus / minus grading. I think we need to see the outcome of tomorrow's events before deciding on further action. The GSS has an official stance against plus / minus grading; the vote was about 3-to-1 last year, although if it were retaken now it might be much closer. Be that as it may, IF the faculty are going to proceed with plus / minus grading, the GSS and USG would accomplish the most by proposing ideas and solutions to eliminate or minimize the negative side effects or consequences of implementing such a system. In particular, serious thought must be given to the refinement of scholarship criteria, the impact on future graduate/professional students, and the consistency with which the grading will be implemented. My suggestion, personally, is that IF the faculty approve the idea of plus / minus grading tomorrow, we should call a meeting for anybody in GSS interested in the issue to discuss problems with plus / minus grading and solutions. I do not think it would be productive to debate the issue. I think all of us, regardless of which side we have taken, should work together to look for answers and perhaps propose these suggestions to the administration through a GSS resolution. Correspondence regarding this issue will be continued later, then, after tomorrow's events are known and reflected upon. ( III ) Attendance and quorum concerns We did not have quorum today, which means that formal votes have to be taken by e-mail to officially validate the items that GSS approved today. John Martin tells me that 33 people are on the roster as GSS senators, and we had less than a third of them present today. Technically, GSS is supposed to remove senators who miss three meetings. The purpose of this is not to be punitive or coercive; rather, we wish to avoid situations like today, because not having quorum creates uncertainty and inefficiency. We understand that schedules are difficult. Senators who cannot make a particular meeting are asked to inform one of the officers in advance. Adam Majewski and I feel that, in such cases, an absence should not be counted against a senator as regards the provision above. Accordingly, an absence of which you have informed us will NOT be counted against you. On the other hand, if there are senators who now find themselves unable to serve on GSS, or who have become uninterested, it would be helpful for us to have this information sooner rather than later, that we might update the roster and avoid the frustration and awkwardness of having to invoke the attendance provision. Rich Charnigo From owner-grads@po.cwru.edu Mon Oct 11 09:24:07 1999 Return-Path: Received: from babar.INS.CWRU.Edu (majord@babar.INS.CWRU.Edu [129.22.8.213]) by fafnir.astr.cwru.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA03317 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:24:07 -0400 Received: (majord@localhost) by babar.INS.CWRU.Edu (8.8.8+cwru/CWRU-3.6) id JAA06127; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:23:51 -0400 (EDT) (from owner-grads@po.cwru.edu for grads-out) X-Authentication-Warning: babar.INS.CWRU.Edu: majord set sender to owner-grads@po.cwru.edu using -f Received: from fafnir.astr.cwru.edu (root@fafnir.ASTR.CWRU.Edu [129.22.148.22]) by babar.INS.CWRU.Edu with ESMTP (8.8.8+cwru/CWRU-3.6) id JAA06108; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:23:45 -0400 (EDT) (from martin@fafnir.astr.cwru.edu for ) Received: (from martin@localhost) by fafnir.astr.cwru.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA03311 for grads@po.cwru.edu; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:23:43 -0400 From: John Martin Message-Id: <199910111323.JAA03311@fafnir.astr.cwru.edu> Subject: GSS Motions To: grads@po.cwru.edu Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 09:23:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL1] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-grads@po.cwru.edu Precedence: bulk Status: RO Voting on the October 6 Grad Student Senate motions was closed at noon on Friday, October 8. The results are as follows: Motion 1: Approval of the '99-'00 budget PASSED In Favor: 14 Opposed: 0 Abstain: 1 Motion 2: Fomation of an adhoc committee to review the GSS Bylaws PASSED In Favor: 12 Opposed: 1 Abstain: 2 Motion 3: Recognition of the grad student groups Lambda Grads, Latter Day Saints Student Assn, and Intervarsity Christian Fellowship PASSED In Favor: 15 Opposed: 0 Abstain: 0 Motion 4: Limited recognition of the History Grad Student Assn. PASSED In Favor: 14 Opposed: 0 Abstain: 1