Executive Committee Meeting 5/8/2015

The executive committee has been fairly quiet this semester – there were some meeting cancellations, and the bulk of conversation has been debating the details of stuff we reported on last semester that was updated in the program documents (thanks again to Professor Woodward!) – i.e. where did that pesky methods requirement come from anyhow? However, in this last meeting, as well as in the annual student meeting that some of you attended last week, a couple important things have come up, and we created a survey for you all so that we (student reps) can hit the ground running next semester in regard to some of these new developments.

First, our EO reported that data on the first exam has been collected and analyzed, and the results of this analysis suggest that some major revision of our first exam process is necessary. The factors predicting an exam result breakdown as follows: no predictor for the Comparative exam; high GPA and GRE scores predict pass rates on the Theory exam; gender (female) predicts fail rates on the IR exam; race (non-white) predicts fail rates on the American exam; and there is not enough data to produce results for Public Policy.  Because fellowship packages have changed admissions, and we no longer use exams as a weeding mechanism, our EO has invited suggestions for a major restructuring of the first exam – a conversation that we assume will begin next semester.

Thus! We (your student reps) have suggested that this conversation take place with some transparency, and in that spirit, we would like you all to reflect on the last year and to think about what needs you have that either 1) could be met more effectively or 2) have not been met at all. To this end, we’ve developed a little survey with some  questions that we would like you to take some time to answer. The plan is to collect and organize responses in such a way that we can bring some ideas to the committee in the fall about ways to address these issues that are beneficial to US (that includes you)! Yay.

Also, there is still a lot of debate about methods. We’ve included a question about that in this survey, so please take the time to let us know what kind of methods class you might be interested in taking in an ideal world where there are an endless amount of course offerings and no possibility that they will ever be cancelled due to lack of interest.

Also also, we did not share course evaluations from last fall because the response rate was so low. There is a question on the survey regarding evaluations so we would really appreciate it if you all took time to answer that one thoughtfully – we are happy to create evaluations for this semester’s courses if that is something that you all are actually interested in.

Much love,
Emily, Erika, B

IMPORTANT POST SCRIPT: The GC now has a lawyer who’s in charge of Freedom of Information Act requests – fyi anything you check, look up, write or do on a GC account/network/server/device is subject to FOIL and that request is easily fulfilled. For example, anything you send on a GC computer, even from your personal email address, any site you access over wi-fi, any emails you send via your GC account on your home computer/phone. Basically anything. The requests thus far have primarily come from outside “political forces” – supposedly the 8th floor is not spying on us, but people outside the institution are interested in the politics of those inside it, thus far requests are related to the politically active.

Executive Committee Meeting Minutes, 12/12/14

**Note that the November meeting was cancelled.

  • EO opened announcements:
    • Colloquium program for Spring 2015 is nearly set; look for announcements as the semester approaches.
    • Reminder: Student Conference is on 27 February and will be an all-day event, as we had a lot of student interest.
  • Student Announcement: Comparative Politics students with the support of Prof. Woodward have organized a weekly Comparative Politics Workshop. The first meeting will take place on Wednesday, 4 February, 4:15pm and feature Andras Bozoki.
  • Bulk of meeting consisted of discussion around changes in the update of documents made by a sub-committee convened expressly for their revision.
    • A huge thanks to Professors Ben Fontana and Susan Woodward, as well as Margaret Cook for taking the lead and doing a lot of detailed work on the documents.
  • Note that the process to amend the bulletin is different from the process to amend the handbook. Updates to the handbook are approved within the department. The bulletin requires the approval of miscellaneous 8th Floor entities. After the handbook has been finalized, the bulletin will be updated.
  • Approved:
    • Updated Handbook with minor adjustments. Once the Curriculum Committee has addressed the suggested revisions, the upated handbook will be made available department-side.
      • Debate:
        • Research Methods vs Methods of Inquiry
          • The problem here that one contingent argues that “Methods of Inquiry” is problematic because it’s vague. It potentially allows Theory students to go through the program without taking a Qualitative or Quantitative methods course. Another contingent argues that we have gaps in the methodology curriculum; we have a methods requirement but don’t offer enough courses to fulfill the requirement. Additionally, it was argued, that Theory students going on the market should have a grasp of some methods of the discipline, even if they are not what they use in their own work.
          • Decision:
            • The debate was tabled until the Spring with continued (but informal) agreement that our program needs to have more methods options. Course proposals with syllabi are being developed and will be considered in the Spring.
          • 700 (3 cr.) vs 800 (4 cr.) Level Courses
            • The students raised the issue that there is not always a meaningful distinction between 700 and 800 level courses and that this can affect time to degree.
              • No change was recorded due to the fact that the distinction is enforced GC-wide. However, the AEO reminded the students that if they run into a problem regarding credits or meeting the five 800-level course min., they should speak to her and/or their professors. They are potentially in a position to assist you, so please advocate for yourself.
            • Faculty Advisement
              • Students raised concerns about the section in the updated handbook stating that each student is assigned a faculty advisor upon entry. The students wanted to know if this would now happen moving forward as previously the practice had been to assign all students to the EO or DEO. Faculty responded that they updated the policy to reflect the aspirations of the department but ultimately the committee decided that there should be a larger conversation about what our policy should be moving forward.
            • First Exam
              • There will be three graders for every exam, and each grader is expected to provide substantial comments in order to ensure that students understand the grade they received regardless of whether they pass or fail.
              • While this is not a change, it should be noted that there was a conversation about what occurs following a student’s second fail of an exam. The policy stands that students who fail an exam twice are automatically terminated from the program. Appeals can be taken up with the EO.
            • Second Exam
              • The updated program documents include an FAQ on what students can expect during the second exam.
              • The language in the handbook and the guidelines states that the third reader is expected to provide comments and questions two weeks prior to the defense date. There was debate about whether the third reader’s comments should be required or simply recommended. The committee kept the language stating that comments are expected from the third reader to indicate to students that while they can ask for a response prior to the defense, they may not receive one.
            • Placement Data on Graduates has been compiled and is in the process of being analyzed. Data will be available shortly. Thanks, Margaret!

 

 

5/8 Graduate Council Meeting minutes

by Jessica Mahlbacher
I. Approval of the Minutes: March 5, 2014 – Interim President Robinson p.13
A. Minutes approved! Chase was very thankful.
II. Opening Comments – Interim President Robinson
A. State Budget Announcement:
1. Good News:
a. Major colleges received an additional 45 million in funds to primarily to cover fringe benefits.
b. They will also receive 65 million to cover the increased tuition revenue, much of that is to cover the difference between tap assistance and the rising tuition level.
TAP has been raised from 5154
c. Community colleges did well, and will now receive 75 dollars more per student from the state.
d. Good for capital funding
2. Okay news:
a. The state is not funding the costs of moving the faculty through contractual steps, this is now on the university.
b. There is some variance in terms of state bureaucratic commitment to assisting CUNY in closing the gap between TAP assistance and rising tuition levels.
c. There were also a number of smaller programs funded by the state.
d. Moderate decrease in what the state is going to allocate for maintenance, but an increase in strategic projects. Chase did not want to proclaim doom and gloom too soon, but the building is 40-50 years old. While the building has been well looked after, we are incurring costs all of the time, including a new set of chillers (which should in the long run save us money).
3. Chase Robinson: “The future is… obscure”: next year will be the end of the five year contract and the governor’s race is coming up. The current occupant of the gubernatorial seat likes to style himself as a “cost-conscious democrat.”
a. The biggest variable is the modified priority of an incoming chancellor. This will not cause problems in the upcoming fiscal year, but it will affect the long run.
B. Commencement!:
1. Dance card for the event
a. There will be the awarding of a Distinguished Alumni Medal: Carol J. Oja https://www.music.fas.harvard.edu/faculty/coja.html
b. Chase wants this to be continued and perhaps expanded, at the very least institutionalized.
c. Professor Uday Mehta will be giving the faculty address, Suzanne Tamang of Computer Science will be giving the student address.
d. The Chancellor will come!
C. Chase wanted to give a shout out to this event with Thomas Piketty. Even has had millions of youtube views.
D. Student Awards:
1. 2 graduate NSF research fellowships
2. The Society of Behavioral Medicine awarded a Distinguished Award for Student Research in 2014
3. One Guggenheim Fellowship to a recent alumni in Philosophy
E. Faculty Honors:
1. Two of the faculty were chosen to be on the National Academy of Science’s panel on the integration of immigrants into American society
2. Matt Gold and the Digital Humanities crew won an NEH start up grant
3. Michelle Fine 2014 Recipient of the Education Award from the Center for Fair and Open Testing
4. The EO of Physics won the Jefferson Science Fellowship Award from the State department
F. Recent Faculty Appointments (Props to the Provost and the English Department:
1. Eric Lott will join the English Department, from the UVA. Also American Studies
2. Feisal Mohamed will join the Department of English in 2015 from the University of Illinois.
3. Chase is delighted for them.
G. Offers are out Urban Education, Anthropology, Jewish Studies, Psychology. It may be awhile before closure.
H. Admission Season (Final numbers will not be ready until the fall).
1. Total number of applications is slightly higher than last year (by 9!), in spite of concerns that it would be down. Chase is heartened by this considering anecdotal evidence points to the national numbers being down.
2. The number of offers is the same as last year.
3. Chase thanked everyone for their hard work, particular props go to the Provost.
4. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it was an extremely strong season, filled with quality students.
I. The Doctoral Student Parental Policy is out, Chase thinks the product is sweet. Props to the members of the Provost and members of the DSC (including our own Sarah Kostecki)
1. Accommodations up through the age of six
2. This is a two year pilot program, this can be tweaked as needed.
3. Chase advises that under this policy, one can have a plethora of children, but they have to be sequential. No doubling up due to twins, triplets, sextuplets etc. “Live long and multiply, but not at the same time!”
III. Granting of Degrees and Certificates to May 2014 – Interim Provost Lennihan
A. Doctor of Philosophy Degree is given to 120 candidates, the Doctor of Musical Arts Degree is given to 1 candidate, Masters of Arts Degree is given to 48 candidates, Master of Philosophy Degree is given to 121 candidates, the Doctor of Cardiology is given to 9 candidates, Doctor of Physical Therapy is given to 47 candidates, and the Doctor of Public Health be given to 1 candidate.
B. Motioned, seconded. Nobody disapproved.
IV. Results of Election to College Association – Professor Thistlethwaite
A. Klara Marton from Speech, Language and Hearing Science
B. Herb Saltzstein from Psychology
C. Thom Thurston from Economics
V. Nominations for two faculty to serve on the Student Complaint Appeals Committee for 2014-2015 -Professor Thistlethwaite (only faculty can make nominations)
A. The biggest single issue that Polly wanted to highlight, and was highlighted repeatedly, was the issue of preferential voting. All candidates, no matter how many there are, have to be ranked under the system of preferential voting. Anyone who puts down their choices, without ranking all of the choices has their vote disqualified. Not for the whole ballot, for that particular slate.

VI. Nominations for Chair, Vice-Chair, and Secretary of Graduate Council for 2014-2016 – Professor Thistlethwaite
A. The chair and the vice chair have to be faculty members, the secretary can be faculty or a student.
B. Marty Burke as chair for 4 years. No one wanted to take this away from him.
C. Gerald Creed has been Vice-Chair. He was (quietly) begging for competition. Somebody nominated Jeremy Porter from Sociology. He decided to stand for the election. Polly said that all we were allowed to know was the department. No one started the revolution.
D. Polly announced that she, as the current Secretary, was the only one who had put her hat in the ring for this position. She hoped for competition. All she got was polite laughter.
VII. Committee on Committees Presentation of nominees for Standing Committees for 2014-2016 -Professor Thistlethwaite
A. There was confusion over whether students could only vote for students, and faculty could only vote for faculty. It was decided that nominations could be made by faculty for faculty, and students could only nominate students, but that everyone could vote for everyone.
B. It is not clear yet whether students’ votes actually count for the faculty, but they figured they could disaggregate the vote to ensure that policy is followed.
C. The Committee on Research is the most popular committee in town.
D. There was no excitement for the rest of the elections for the standing committees. No last minute nominations.
E. The nomination and elections process took a good 35 minutes. Chase warned that we had not heard the last of preferential voting. Clearly its minutes were numbered.
VIII. Committee on Curriculum and Degree Requirements – Ms. Anne Donlon p.17
A. Change to PhD in Computer Science, the new first exam is getting a 70% or higher on the algorithms test and a B+ average in the 4 core classes. New Classes added.
B. Change in Criminal Justice PhD, elimination of Forensic Science specialization. John Jay had provided the funding, and they elected to no longer spend the money. Current students shall be supported.
C. PhD Program in Hispanic and Luso-Brazilian Literatures and Languages Changes to Admission and Requirements. Two new core courses as well.
D. PhD program in Nursing- Changes First Examination: “State of the Science” paper.
E. New MALS track in Childhood and Youth Studies and two new courses, Introduction to Childhood and Youth Studies, Childhood and Youth Studies. Potential link with the Brooklyn BA program, no MA exists like this yet in CUNY.
F. 0 credit course on prospectus and dissertation seminar for Philosophy department
G. The department of Public Health is trying to make the tracks more distinct in accordance with their accrediting body. They are changing the credits and also adding new courses.
IX. Minor Items
A. Change to 2 HLBLL courses
B. Computer Science is changing credit hours for 3-4, and then the Seminar “Research at CUNY” is now the “Research Survey”
X. Committee on Structure:
A. Changes to the Bylaws and the governance of the Graduate School from the governance. Get rid of preferential voting, instead going with plurality voting. That was not voted on in the session, the “Committee on Committees” gets the final say in how the voting would take place.
1. Chase points out that the arcane elements of preferential voting are not fully appreciated. Many people will not know “how to compare a candidate that we do not know well with a candidate that we do not know at all.”
2. The Committee on Structure is most concerned about disenfranchisement. Proper filling out of paperwork
3. Polly is also worried about the distribution of candidates, and the large number of candidates for committees such as Research
4. In the end, preferential voting was eliminated from the bylaws and the governance.
C. New governance for the Masters in Middle Eastern Studies.
D. Revised governance for the Women’s Studies Program.
XI. Presentation of the Standing Committees
XII. Professor Burke gave a report from the university faculty senate.
A. Still short on alternates for the Faculty Senate
B. Project for a larger institutional repository program is still in process, it is hoped this will be tied to the CUNY commons. It should be voluntary, not mandatory.

 

Executive Committee Minutes, 4/11 Meeting

by Rachel Brown

I. Admitted Students
A.) 14 students were offered admission to the PhD program this year
i.) Increasing number of accepted PhD applicants come in with MAs
ii.) All admitted students this year also received offers to other schools
iii.) This year, the Political Science Program has been given permission to go   above the limit of 12 admitted applicants, but anyone admitted above this number will not receive a    fellowship or tuition remission (normally 9 fellowship and 3 tuition remission offers are handed out
iv.) Starting with the Fall 2015 cohort, when students with fellowships take a leave of absence their fellowship money will be converted into money for the colleges at which they were appointed for the hiring of adjuncts, rather than given to unfunded students.
B.) 6 MA students out of 11 who were offered admissions have accepted
C.) There is some discussion of adjusting the admissions’s policy next year to offer admissions to the MA program for highly qualified applicants who are rejected from PhD program.
D.) Throughout the GC, faculty are discussing how to increase enrollment, balance the number of Phd and Master’s students, and increase revenue.

II. Website
A.) The newly convened Website Committee (Alyson Cole, Margaret Cook, Nick Micinski, Chris Michael and Rachel Brown) will work with the Marketing and Communications office to improve the website. The soon-to-be-spiffified website will have a section for PhD students on the market that lists their research interests and links to their CVs.

III. Curriculum Committee
A.) Next year’s Curriculum Committee will help establish a database of how people from our program fare on the job market (i.e. whether they are in full-time teaching or tenure track positions,working in the non-profit sector, whether they have turned their dissertation into books etc.).
B.) Next year’s committee will also work to update the guidelines for dissertation proposals and the examination procedures for first and second exams

IV. Faculty Membership Committee
A.) Next year’s Faculty Membership Committee will likely revisit the guidelines for faculty appointments to the GC. Members will consider whether it is necessary for faculty members to be a member of only one subfield and how to balance the limited number of courses and limited number of teaching opportunities with the many potential faculty members whose research and dissertation guidance could add significantly to the department.

VI. Course Credits
A.) Faculty have discussed various ways of addressing the differential amount of credits granted to 8000-level courses (4 credits) versus 7000-level courses (3 credits) despite that the workloads do not necessarily reflect this difference. This is especially an issue for non-NYC residents receiving tuition remission who must pay for any credits above 9. Potential options, which will be discussed and decided upon at a later time, include:
i.) Students could take 2 3-credit courses and sign up for a Weighted Instructional Unit. They would only need permission for adding a WIU if they add it after the registration period ends; otherwise, they could simply add it themselves.
ii.) Professors could determine whether they want to make a course 8000-level, which would necessarily entail a research paper rather than an in-class or take home midterm and final, or 7000-level, which would necessarily entail a midterm and a final instead of a research paper
iii.) All classes would be worth 3 credits
iv.) Students could determine whether they want to take a course for 3 credits (midterm/final) or 4 credits (research paper)

VII.) Program Evaluation Course
A.) There has been a student request to reinstate a skill-based program evaluation course for practitioners interested in monitoring and evaluation within NGOs. Some Executive Committee members suggested one way to address this request is to give credit to those taking the equivalent course at Baruch.

VIII. Department Colloquium
A.) Currently a coalition of faculty and students from the Executive Committee are developing a department colloquium that will take place on Thursday afternoons every 3-4 weeks. For the months of September/October 2014-2015 academic year, sessions will be mock job talks for students on the market. For the remaining months there would be 2 back-to-back talks by level III students and sometimes faculty inside and outside of CUNY, perhaps followed by wine and cheese if there is enough money. The goal is to foster an interdisciplinary intellectual community across the sub-fields and to increase professional development opportunities for students. Given the discussions about program participation, involvement and attendance following the collapse of the student conference, this is an initiative we should all support if we want to make change in program culture (and/or to make it run like an actual program!). This initiative would require regular participation or else the colloquium can do nothing to change the culture we so passionately decry on the listserv.

IX. CUNY-Wide Trends
A.) Both Queens College and Baruch are considering instituting masters programs, the former in Political Science and the latter in Global Studies
B.) Across the university administrators are under increasing pressure to consider online courses

 

March 5 Graduate Council Minutes

by Sarah Kostecki

 

  1. I.               Approval of the Minutes: December 11, 2013 – Interim President Robinson
  • Minutes approved

 

  1. II.              Opening Comments Interim –  President Robinson
  • First discussed Andre Aciman and Bill Kelly in Conversation – “The Art of Writing” the previous evening. Noted the event went well.
  • 5 Main items discussed:

1)     Chase Highlighted Bill Kelly’s letter on his decision to return to the faculty. Chase noted the GC is what is because of Bill and that we are fortunate he is stepping down, but not leaving the GC. Stated there is currently a search to fill GC Presidency. First meeting of the Presidential Search Committee on March 4th was well attended.

2)     Noted it was admission season. He highlighted the new funding packages (again), and the increased recruitment support to departments. He noted the quantity and quality of applicants has not fallen, though quantity varied across departments. Stated there were many exceptional candidates across the board.

3)     Paul Krugman to join LIS this year and the Economics faculty in September 2015. Highlighted a critical factor of Paul’s decision to join the GC is his public commitment to the study of income inequality.

4)     Chase nominated 2 professors for the title of distinguished professor – David Joselit (History Dept) and Joan Richardson (English).

5)     Acknowledged the budget – no new news on this. On Friday, March 7th Chase (along with others I presume) is meeting with Gale Brewer in The City Council, and others from Albany and elsewhere to make a pitch for increased resources to the GC. Chase said he plans to be as persuasive as possible and is filled with optimism regarding the fiscal stability of the GC in the coming years.

 

III. Granting of Degrees and Certificates to February 2014 Interim Provost Lennihan

M.A., M.Phil., Ph.D. candidates (only faculty vote on this item)

  • Approved

 

IV. Granting of Honorary Degrees for May 2014 Commencement –   Interim President Robinson

Professor Emeritus Eugene Goodheart – Doctor of Humane Letters

Mr. Leonard A. Lauder – Doctor of Humane Letters

Ján Vilček, M.D., Ph.D. – Doctor of Humane Letters

  • Approved with Abstentions. A faculty member from the Linguistics department asked why there were no women included in the list for Honorary Degrees. Chase responded with something about the search committee, lack of viable candidates, and that the search committee plans to be “more inclusive” in the future.

 

V. Committee on Curriculum and Degree Requirements – Ms. Anne Donlon

A. Major Items

1. Ph.D. Program in Art History – Changes to Curriculum p.18

2. Ph.D. Program in Psychology – Clinical Psychology – changes to curriculum p.21

3. Ph.D. Program in Psychology – Clinical Psychology – new courses p.24

a. Integrative Foundations in Psychotherapy

b. Lifespan Development

c. Health of Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals

d. Clinical Issues in Adolescence

e. Contemporary Psychoanalytic Theory: Winnicott

f. Family Systems Theory, Treatment, and Research II

g. Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy

h. Special Topics in Clinical Psychology

4. Ph.D. Program in Psychology – New Course p.38

a. Neuroscience Rotation

5. Doctor of Public Health Program – Changes to Curriculum p.40

6. Doctor of Public Health Program – New Courses p.44

a. Health Policy and Management

b. Health Policy Analysis Methods

7. Certificate in Critical Theory – new course

a. Critical Theory: Foundations and Practices p.48

  • All approved

 

B. Minor Item

1. Certificate Program in ITP – change to course p.50 a. ITCP 89010

  • Approved

 

VI. Committee on Structure –  Prof. Barbara Weinstein

  • 2 Previous meetings were cancelled due to snow. At the next Grad Council meeting they will have an update on bylaws revisions.

 

VII. DSC Information Packet on Expressive Activities Appendix 2

  • The policy on expressive action was tabled at the last Grad Council meeting. The item was removed from the table. There was a discussion about the merits and necessity of the Draft Policy on Expressive Activity from 6/27/2013. No statement is slated to be sent to the Board of Trustees this year. Some thought the Grad Council should not be voting to approve or not approve a policy. Another faculty member expressed confusion as to why the prohibited actions were necessary when most of them were already against the law. She didn’t think CUNY should be in the habit of making law.
  • Therefore the Grad Council voted the draft of the policy from 6/27/2013 is obsolete.
  • We moved to amend only the bottom three paragraphs of the proposed Resolution on Draft CUNY Policy on Expressive Conduct. The amended resolution will now read as followed:

“Whereas existing educational laws and CUNY policies already set legal standards for protests at CUNY; therefore be it Resolved, that as a university founded as the result of dissent, CUNY should uphold the highest standards for freedom of speech and assembly; and Resolved that the Graduate Center Graduate Council calls on the University Administration to withdraw from any future consideration by the Board of Trustees the proposed “Policy on Expressive Conduct and any successor draft that may be issued

 

VIII. University Faculty Senate – Report Prof. Martin Burke

  • No report given

 

IX. New Business

  • None.
  • Meeting Adjourned at 3:49 pm

Executive Committee Minutes, 2/21 meeting

by John McMahon

EO Report

Course Enrollment/Course Caps

  • course caps at 12 people will be enforced with loopholes
  • Because of new fellowship regime, there are fewer people in the program, but still need to fill seats to keep courses afloat
    • Course caps can effectively redistribute bodies
  • Need 5 people to start a course; once a class meets once, it cannot be cancelled, so need 5 people at the start even if they later drop
    • Classes not running an especially big problem for consortial faculty
  • Policy going forward: registration for a course capped at 12, above that there will be a wait list
    • Will be left to the discretion of the professor running the course how many to allow in above 12
    • Advice from the EO: if you really want to be in a course, show up, talk to the prof, talk to the EO – you should be able to get into any course you want
      • Getting in, though, will happen once the semester begins, not before

 

First Exams

  • Department bylaws require only 2 graders on First Exams; the practice going forward, though, will be that all exams should be read by 3 graders
    • Most subfields doing this already – IR sometimes only two
  • EO is instructing subfield chairs to have them/their exam graders write fuller comments and provide better feedback on first exams – at least three or four sentences (instead of the 1-2 sentences often received now), preferably at least a paragraph or two
    • This is paired with greater pressure to avoid professors writing grades like ‘low pass’, ‘high pass,’ etc. on exams: grade has to fall in a given category, but can shade/add nuance in longer comments
  • Winter First Exam Results
    • 3 CP (2 pass)
    • 5 IR (4 pass)

 

Admissions (overview from DEO)

  • 149 applicants this year (126 PhD applicants)
    • slight decline from past years, probably because of increased media/general awareness of terribleness of academic job market + balancing out from especially high application levels after 2008-9 crash
  • good subfield distribution, although PT and CP continue to be strongest
  • will be 12 PhDs admitted (9 on GCFs, 3 on tuition fellowships)
    • department may push 8th floor to allows program to exceed cap of 12 if strong international students are bringing funding from their home countries
  • some worry expressed that GC has become a “more desirable safety school” for the top candidates
    • because of better fellowship packages, probably
    • may not be able to get the top preferred candidates to actually come

 

Passing of Howard Lentner

  • Will remember him as part of Alumni Awards Night; someone will be invited to say a few words regarding his life, research, and contributions to the program

 

New Business

Student Appeal Procedures

  • In the event of any future student appeals that come to the Executive Committee, students will be asked to leave after specified amount of time to present their case and answer any questions

 

New Business from Student Reps

Methods Requirement

  • Reps noticed that there is a discrepancy between the Student Handbook – which says that taking a methods class is ‘advisable’ – and the GC Bulletin entry for our program – which says that a methods class is ‘required’
    • From Registrar’s perspective, GC Bulletin is ruling document, so for them to move a student to Level III, there must be a methods class taken
    • Students have gotten caught in this interstice
  • Student Rep request: these documents need to be brought into line with another
  • Debate: do we as a program a) need a clearly delineated requirement OR b) want to maintain the slippage between Handbook and Bulletin, so that EO has possible flexibility to massage the requirement a bit?
    • General agreement that regardless of the way it is manifested, there should not be this slippage
  • Decision: Student Handbook will be revised to say that a methods course is required, bringing it in line with GC Bulletin; paired with commitment for this requirement to be “broadly manifested” in terms of course offerings
    • Methods training necessary in terms of marketability for jobs
    • Will not narrowly apply this requirement; possibility of developing a broader course along the lines of ‘Methods of Inquiry’
      • Quantitative and qualitative methods as used in rest of political science not necessarily applicable/important for Theory students
    • Need greater commitment in the program to teach quantitative methods
    • Not one specific course that fulfills this requirement – attempt to maintain some flexibility in how students fulfill it

 

Revision of “Political Science Examination Protocols” and “Format for Preparing a Dissertation Proposal”

  • Student Rep request: Both of these documents should be reviewed and updated
    • Examination Protocols last updated 2004; Proposal guidelines last updated 2002
    • Are a number of practices in the Examination Protocols that are wrong/not consistent with practice and with Student Handbook
  • Faculty agree that these documents need to be updated
  • Curriculum and Exams Committee will be charged with performing a review and possible revision
    • Ensures both students and faculty involvment

 

Mock Job Talks

  • Student Reps presented overview of idea for Mock Job Talks; faculty agree this is a good idea
  • Meeting had run over, reps asked to follow-up over email
  • Student Reps have meeting scheduled with EO to start to finalize organization/logistics/procedures for mock job talks

Executive Committee Minutes, 12/13 meeting

by John McMahon

I. 5-year response to 10-year review

  • Progress Report on 21 recommendations from external reviewers in 2008 review of the program: in-progress, in draft form
  • Plan is to use this as clarification/emphasis on asking for resources (e.g,. central line American Politics hire after Prof. Piven retires; hire in IR (in IPE)
  • Issues of discussion in report
    • Course offerings and role of consortial faculty
      • Some concern expressed that GC attempting to move away from having faculty from the campuses teach at GC
      • Fewer consortial faculty teaching at GC was true for budget reasons 1-3 years ago, but not the case now
      • Program enrollment numbers can maintain similar number and distribution of courses
      • Acknowledgment that program needs to do better institutionalizing process for recruiting, bringing in campus faculty to teach, get to know GC faculty and students, and eventually become consortial doctoral faculty
        • Obstacles: budgets, varying interest and relationships with the chairs of POLSC programs across CUNY
        • Currently, Core Seminar in program every year taught by faculty from a CUNY Campus (Prof. Majic this year, Prof. Feldman last year) with eye to adding them to doctoral faculty down the line
    • Need expressed to increase efforts to recruit MA students
    • Discussion over whether the 700-level/800-level distinction actually works in practice
      • Is there really a difference between the two? Often have 700-level courses with seminar papers
      • Program could make courses be worth any number of credits
        • Any adjustments would have to take into account what Fellowships will cover for international students and first year of out-of-state students before they get residency status
      • Student Reps asked to conduct survey of student body to gather data regarding experience and perception of 700/800-level distinction
        • Will take place in the Spring

II. Interim EO

  • Appointment decisions for Interim EO position entirely run through office of GC President and Provost
    • Current EO and many faculty expressed frustration that this process has yet to be completed by GC administration
    • No formal process for GC administration
    • No formal mechanism for faculty or student advising
  • Hopefully will find out soon
  • Prof. Rollins leaves program for sabbatical mid-January

III. Spring events

  • Resources exist for to invite speakers in Spring for talks on income inequality and related issues
    • May partly function as highly informal pre-recruitment situation to engage with potential future applicants for American Politics line once Prof. Piven retires
      • Upshot: GO TO THESE – may be chance for input down the line

IV. Gittell Professorship

  • kind of a mess: 2 failed searches for Gittell Professorship
    • one problem: difficulty finding one person for different programs (POLSC, Sociology, Psychology) to agree on

V. Website

  • Committee okays plan for semesterly review of student section of website to be conducted by Executive Committee student reps
  • after argument/discussion, student research interests will not be added to student portion of website

 

Grad Council Minutes, 12/11 Meeting

by Kristofer Petersen-Overton and Sarah Kostecki

I.   Approval of the Minutes: October 16, 2013

 

II.  Opening Comments – Interim President Robinson  

Robinson discussed the upcoming submission of the Middle States Commission on Higher Education accreditation report, due by June 1, 2015. He mentioned that standards have risen as Middle States attempts to bolster its reputation, but he’s confident the GC will be fine.

Stressing a new emphasis on training PhDs for extra-academic careers, Robinson bragged about a tweet from @versatilePhD: “@CUNYGradCenter is truly a model for 21st century doctoral ed! Dean Olan was inspiring! #CGS53”

Apparently we’re blazing the way in this area.

Finally, Robinson heaped praise on an article in the Huffington Post (“Why State Universities Are Best”), penned by GC alum, Gina Barreca: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina-barreca/why-state-universities-ar_b_4420067.html

 

III. Committee on Curriculum and Degree Requirements (all passed without serious debate)

A. Major Items

1. Ph.D. Program in Psychology – Clinical Forensic Psychology – changes in curriculum

2. Ph.D. Program in Psychology – New Courses

a.  Evidence-Based Treatment of Adults with Severe Mental Illness

b.  Empirically Supported Treatments for Substance Abuse

c.  Structural Equation Modeling

d.  Hierarchical Linear Modeling

3. Ph.D. Program in Economics – New Course

a.  Panel Econometrics

4. Proposal for Certificate in Critical Theory

 

IV. Committee on Structure

The committee is currently reviewing various governance documents and has developed a template for programs revising their constitutions, policies, etc.

A. Revised Computer Science Program Governance

B. Revised English Program Governance    

 

V. University Faculty Senate – Report

The UFS Committee on Academic Freedom is concerned over CUNY’s draft policy on “expressive conduct” (see here: https://psc-cuny.org/sites/default/files/Expressive%20Conduct.pdf). It’s widely viewed as overreach, fallout from CUNY’s shuttering of the Morales/Shakur Center at CCNY (See here and here) and the charges CUNY is proceeding with against students. For now, the UFS is waiting to see what will happen. They have two potential problems with such a policy:

 

1) It might be taken to suggest a more constrained view of expression. There is a wide diversity of opinion about this among provosts and presidents, not to mention faculty at all the satellite schools. 2) The document might tie our hands at the campuses in favor of a centralized CUNY-wide policy. Policies that accommodate the balance between freedom of expression and teaching, learning and working should be left to the individual colleges to decide. Interim President Robinson suggested the balance is just right at the Grad Center and would not necessarily want to see the balance upset by overbearing rulings from CUNY central. He intends to resist any infringement of Grad Center autonomy on these issues.

At this point, Colin Ashley (Co-Chair for Business at the Doctoral Students Council, attempted to raise the issue of the Grad Council condemning any effort to regulate “expressive conduct.” The motion was tabled after interim President Robinson pointed out that a final draft is not yet ready and that it would be premature to oppose it until then. The DSC countered that any resolution would oppose “any attempt” to regulate expressive conduct as the faculty has done at places like Hunter and Brooklyn College. Still, the body voted to table the motion.

 

VI. New Business

No new business introduced.