Monthly Archives: March 2014

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