Tag Archives: first exam

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

9/20 Executive Committee meeting notes

Notes taken by Joanna Tice.
John McMahon was also in attendance.
Executive Committee Meeting Notes 9/20/13:
EO Report:
CUNY First is coming to the GC
– This may affect purchasing of things like wine and cheese in that it will be a bigger deal (more annoying) for faculty to sign off on these purchases.
– CUNY First will also eventually be used for faculty recruiting
– So far, just as on the campuses, everyone is complaining about CUNY First
Faculty Membership Report:
– Discussion of Prof. Petchesky’s emeritus status will occur between this meeting and the beginning of 2014.
– A question was raised by John Wallach as to what responsibilities and privileges come with that status
– Prof. Rollins explained that there are no responsibilities, but there are continued privileges (teaching classes, attending events, attending committee meetings if they so choose, library card, etc)
Funding:
– The EO is pleased that the department is now providing some sort of funding for all POLSC students and that they actually have extra UF money to spare (~ $20,000).
– That money will go to a Summer 2014 Pre-Dissertation Travel Award.
– These applications will be due by October 14th and decisions will be announced by the end of October.
– Margaret sent out an email last week regarding how to apply.
Exams:
– 65% pass rate overall (a 13 to 7 split)
– Pass rate for August Exams by subfield:
– American: 66%
– Comparative: 66%
– IR: 62%
– Theory: 50%
– Public Policy: 100%
-According to the EO, no appeals will be necessary this semester, but if anyone is interested, the sequence for appeals is provided by the GC bylaws as follows:
1) EO
2) Executive Committee
3) Provost’s Office
– The bylaws require only 2 readers on each exam committee. If there is a split, the EO will ask a 3rd to step in.
– The Committee desires to change the perception that the exams are a weeding out mechanism by explaining that it is very difficult for the EO or the Executive committee to actually remove a student based on failure of an exam. There are very few historical examples of such attempts, and it is next to impossible.
– However, the EO encouraged the faculty to be faster and more complete in producing their comments, as they comments are “of the utmost importance” in processing the exam results. This has been an ongoing issue for at least the last 4 years (since Joanna has been in the program) and is one that the students should continue to push back on in the future. Hold your exam committees and the EO responsible when results are not prompt. There is too much at stake, especially for students who need to pass on to the next level for reduced tuition.
– He claims he has only terminated one student in his tenure and it was “the ethical thing to do” in the circumstance.
– SatProgs and failed exams do not go on a permanent record in the sense that they do not show up on your transcript that you might send to an employer, but there will be a note of it in your file. (The only people who have access to those files are the current EO, Margaret, and the student owner of the file.)
Update to 2008 Program Self-Study:
– EO is in the process of writing an evaluation of the work the program has done since the 2008 self-study
Admissions:
– Last year was the first year of a 3-year cycle of reducing class size (to support new GC fellowship), but POLSC is already basically at the level we need to be at.
Readmission requests:
– Policy: students attempting to re-enter to write their dissertation should re-take their first exam if they are out for more than a decade.
-But because we are a state school, everything can be appealed
– We need to devise mechanisms/policies to prevent these absurd readmissions (for example, a request by someone from the 1990’s who FAILED 5 out of 7 of there classes and is now asking for readmission)
-A new policy is being drafted to deal with cases a certain number of years out
– Such a policy exists in the admissions committee, but it is not in handbook or bylaws
– The EO will show this new policy to the committee at the next meeting
– “Readmission suppresses the quality of our program”
Department Website student page (brought up by student reps):
Please see John McMahon’s email yesterday for more info addressing the implementation of student website content.
Subfield Pages: Need some editing (brought up by student reps):
Margaret will send an email to current subfield chairs to ask for renewal/possible resubmission of information on subfield pages
– Students and faculty are asked to email Margaret if you notice an error on the site (as it is controlled by the GC, things sometimes go haywire without anyone in POLSC touching anything.
Subfield Chairs have also been asked to review their exam reading lists and there was discussion of whether or not to establish a rule about how often these lists are updated.
Marshall Berman Memorial Student Award (brought up by student reps):
-EO response: there is concern (in regards to a memorial service and/or award) of eclipsing or stepping on the toes of people at City College
– We obviously want to go forward with both a memorial service and an award, but that is the political context that needs to be worked out.
– Given how recent Marshall’s passing was, the seemingly sensitive politics around it with City College, and the general commitment to the topic from both students and faculty, it is something to address once more time has passed
Open Defenses (raised by student reps):
For various reasons, faculty do not think that open defenses are a good idea, instead they propose a two-pronged approach.
1) a required job talk (to practice for job market) could be a public event
2) Non-public defense (but student is allowed to bring a small number of guests (close family and friends).

Executive Committee Minutes, 9/21 Meeting

*Submitted by Joanna Tice, on behalf of your student representatives to the Executive Committee: John McMahon, Aleta Styers and Joanna Tice

1) New Graduate Center Fellowships: Announces major shift in the fellowship funding/structure, coming into effect for students entering in the 2013-14 school year
– The Enhanced Chancellors Fellowship will be replaced by a new fellowship (Probably called the Graduate Center Fellowship)
– Stipend increased to $25,000 annually + tuition remission
– Same 5 years guaranteed funding with 1 year RA position, 3 years teaching (reduced to a 1-1 teaching load, potentially transferable to a 0-2 or 2-0) and 5th year writing fellowship
– Purpose: to make GC fellowships competitive with other institutions.
– All PhD students NOT receiving a fellowship WILL be receiving a tuition waiver
– MA funding possibilities will remain the same (i.e., limited)
– This was accomplished by requiring a 25% reduction in funded PhD students, institution-wide. However, our department already accomplished that reduction in the last few years, so it will mean a reduction of only 1 or 2 PhD students at most for PS. This does not apply to MAs (if anything, MAs may be increased).
– THIS DOES NOT CHANGE THE FELLOWSHIP FUNDING AND STRUCTURE FOR ALREADY MATRICULATED STUDENTS

2) Composition of Entering Class this Fall: a substantial majority are Theory and IR students, followed by Comparative, American, very few in Public Policy, but those few appear very focused with research objectives already clear.

3) 1st Exam results: This year was one of the most successful years on record for successful completion of the first exam
– 25 out of 30 students passed their respective exams
– 13 students changed levels
– more people taking exams earlier
– faculty from two of the fieds commented upon relatively weak responses in some of the passing exams.

4) The Gittell Chair/Samuel’s Center Faculty Search: This search has been adjusted over the summer and the position would no longer be housed in the Samuel’s Center
– The Search is somewhat up in the air, as a permanent position has been offered but most likely this scholar will not accept (based on family situation) and thus the position will be offered to a number of visiting scholars until a match is found
– The Faculty Membership Committee is still actively pursuing an IPE line

5) Budget: Budget for the department seems stable – there will be no reduction in courses or entrenchment on hiring

6) Professional Development Workshop Planning: DEO (Rosalind Petchesky) announcement about planning process of student professional development workshop.
– Several students on the list serve have expressed interest in a workshop about the 2nd and 3rd exams. We brought this up with Professor Petchesky and she suggested that students interested in those topics suggest them on the Questionnaire sent out by the department last week (sent by Margaret on the 14th).
– If you are interested in a workshop on the 2nd or 3rd exams, please submit the questionnaire ASAP and write-in that request in the “other topics” section of the form.

7) Department Website Improvement: Joe is proposing to launch a committee to overhaul the website in the coming months. He will most likely need student volunteers to participate in that committee, if anyone has particular interest, you might let him know.

8. Changing of the Guard: Just FYI, Joe will probably be taking a sabbatical for half of next year and for half of the year after that. Apropos this, he spoke of the need to identify and train new a new EO and a new DEO to replace Ros