Graduate and Professional Student Assembly Council of Representatives Notes

Big Red Barn Greenhouse April 9, 2001 5:00–6:00p.m.

I. Call To Order L. Sekaric, Applied Physics Representative and Vice-President of the 2000–2001 GPSA, called the meeting to order at 5:02 p.m.

II. Open Forum L. Sekaric reminded members that if they were appointed to a committee that had a two year term that they would still continue serving on the committee next year even if they would not be continuing on in their role as a GPSA COR member next year. She asked that anyone unable to continue serving on a committee to let Bonnie Bailey, Office of the Assemblies, know. The committee work is important and continuity is desirable.

III. Announcements and Reports A) GPSA Update It was noted that all major GPSA business would be incorporated in the other agenda items throughout the meeting.

B) Meeting with Dean Cohen L. Sekaric reported she and P. Carr met with Dean Cohen last week to discuss changes to the Code of Academic Integrity for graduate students and international TA summer training. She said this would be discussed in more detail later in the meeting.

C) International TA Summer Training L. Sekaric summarized that undergraduates presented a resolution last semester calling for international TA’s to have instruction in English and teaching before they could start teaching students. The Provost’s office responded favorably. The result of this effort is that all international TA’s that come from a country where English is not a native language would now be required to attend a 2 week training program before classes start. Foreign students who received their education in this country would probably only be required to take the advanced teaching courses, and not English training.

L. Sekaric continued explaining that during the exit interview a committee must come to a consensus that the student could teach and communicate effectively. If this doesn’t happen, the student would be given other options such as a fellowship, RA, being sent back home, etc.

L. Sekaric reported that Dean Walter Cohen and the undergraduates were in agreement that this requirement probably wouldn’t be too tightly implemented this year since departments felt that it would be too short of notice for students.

L. Sekaric announced that the International TA Training Program Committee is open to suggestions and she asked if people knew of anyone who would be good at teaching these courses for this program, etc. to email LS63@cornell.edu and she would forward it on.

D) Ivy League GPSA Meeting J. Sebastian, Medieval Studies Representative, reported to the group that he attended the Ivy League Graduate and Professional Student Conference that was recently held at Yale. Many issues important to graduate students were raised, such as health insurance, unionization, stipends, graduate school space, etc. He reported that a package of the minutes would come out that would give comparative information and enable a comparison of Cornell to other Ivy League institutions. He said he would make the report available to everyone.

J. Sebastian noted that Cornell’s GPSA seems to have as much or more money as the other schools. It doesn’t, however, sponsor grand scale graduate student social events throughout the year. Other schools seem to spend more of their money on those types of events, and not much else. He thought the GPSA might consider sponsoring these big events that might help make them more visible to the Cornell community.

E) Committee Updates

K. Thompson, Floriculture and Ornamental Horticulture Representative, announced that the Provost’s Advisory Committee on Distance Learning would be drafting a resolution to be presented to the Provost tomorrow. He asked members to let him know if they had any suggestions.

L. Sekaric asked about MIT’s policy where they put all course materials on-line for free. She wondered if Cornell was influenced by this policy at all?

K. Thompson replied that MIT only has “skeletons” of the courses available on-line, not the entire course where one can receive certification. He answered that, at this point, Cornell isn’t considering doing it free of charge.

P. Carr, Geological Sciences Representative and President of the 2000–2001 GPSA, asked where they are getting the funding from these individual courses?

K. Thompson replied that Ecornell would basically be taking a position of an academic publisher and they would not be limiting professors from receiving funding from other groups wanting to do distance learning. Graduate students would not be entitled to profits or royalties.

M. Gayne, History Representative, asked if there was a committee connected to the Cornell Concert Commission. She expressed a concern about a policy that doesn’t allow people to bring in water bottles during concerts held at Barnes, yet they don’t sell water and there are only 2 water fountains available for everyone to use.

L. Sekaric replied that there are undergraduate students on the concert commission and she thought graduate students would also be welcome to join or run for a position.

IV. Business (old and new) A) Ph.D. Robes

K. Levac, Nutrition Representative, reported that Connie Mabry, the Commencement Coordinator, spoke with the commencement committee and Dean Cohen. They said that if a change were implemented, everyone would be required to rent the red robes for approximately a $40 rental fee. There would not be an option to Ph.D. candidates to rent either the black or the red robes for commencement.

K. Levac noted that responses to her email have been mostly favorable, with people saying they would choose the red robe and agree to pay more for the robe rental. The tally was recorded as: 45 red, 8 black. Additionally, 4 departments responded without providing numbers. Of those, 3 departments said they preferred red and 1 department said black.

K. Levac said that she must get back to C. Mabry by the end of April with the decision because Cornell would be re-writing the contract with the gown company in the beginning of May.

K. Levac asked for advice on how to deal with the votes in order to make a decision. Should she go with the majority of respondents from the poll? Two-thirds?

B. Krishnamachari, Engineering Representative, asked to wait on making a decision until the next GPSA business meeting. In the meantime, students would be told to express their concerns to their GPSA representative and the representatives could bring those suggestions to the meeting.

K. Thompson asked if there was a way to filter the responses to only ask Ph.D. candidates?

K. Levac responded that she was relying on COR members to forward the message/poll to their constituents and assume that people who cared about this issue would respond.

M. Gayne asked if they know why people were opposed to the red robes?

K. Levac responded that no one has given reasons.

J. Sebastian reported that half, of the approximately half a dozen of those who responded from his department, preferred the red robes. A couple of people aesthetically preferred black, and others were going into academia and didn’t want to rent the red robe and buy the black one.

V. Augusta asked if this price would only be a one-time investment to make the red robes. She wondered why students are going to be charged a $40 fee throughout the years once the robes are made.

L. Sekaric commented that she was not hearing a strong preference either way.

S. Hames commented that most departments are saying yes to the red.

B. Krishnamachari reported that out of 23 responses that he received, 21 were in favor of the red and 2 didn’t care.

Tanya Gwathmey, Physiology Representative, reported approximately 20 students were polled in her department and approximately half of them aesthetically preferred black and the other half just felt that the degree was the most important thing and they didn’t care about the color of the robe.

M. Gayne felt the issue of why there is a continuous $40 rental fee being imposed on the students after the robes are already made the first time is separate from whether to change from black robe rental to red robe rental. She commented that the robes do not get re-made each year; they are re-rented.

K. Levac responded that the law school robe rental cost has been consistently $40 and that has not decreased. A possible reason for this charge is that the red robe quality is much nicer than the black and it may cost more to launder.

P. Carr added that the black robes can be rented anywhere, but the red robes are only rented to Cornell and have the Cornell seal on them. Therefore, the red robes cannot be rented to other universities.

D. Brown, Agricultural Economics Representative, commented that when all the other Ph.D. graduate students are added to the law school students that the number of red robes Cornell rents would obviously increase. He felt the robe company should be willing to lower the price.

K. Levac said that she is hesitant about mentioning the price since Cornell has a long-standing relationship and contract with this company.

K. Levac asked that all responses be forwarded to her. She will write up a resolution to present at the next GPSA meeting and she will email out a reminder for COR members to send out to their constituents and invite people to come to the next meeting to voice their concerns.

B) Code of Academic Integrity L. Sekaric explained that Cornell’s Code of Academic Integrity covers everyone and it was pointed out by grads that graduate students are more seriously impacted because their funding may be affected. Another main objection raised by graduate students is that at the initial hearing phase people that are supposed to be present are the faculty member who is either bringing the charges or involved in the case, the student, and an independent person or the chair person of the faculty member’s department. This “or” is what is in question since it could set up 2 people on one side versus the student being charged.

L. Sekaric continued that if the student is found guilty at the preliminary hearing, the faculty member could impose punishment, such as failure in the course. However, for graduate students the punishment may also affect TA-ship and/or the person’s funding.

L. Sekaric proposed three options: 1) a new code for graduate students 2) make exceptions for graduate students 3) change the preliminary hearing policy

P. Carr recommended that they request to delete the sentence in the Code that “the chairperson of the department can appoint an independent person for the hearing”.

P. Carr also suggested that they approach the Dean of Faculty’s office because they are the people who put this out.

P. Carr gave an example of a case where a student had his/her funding cut and status changed.

A. Pleasant added that in a recent case everyone followed the rules but it still resulted in a bad situation. He suggested adding a layer of protection for graduate students since the word “or” doesn’t mandate anyone actually be there. He felt that it should be mandated that someone impartial be there for the initial hearing.

V. Augusta argued that just to strike that particular line might not be enough because undergraduate and graduate student situations are different. She felt placing more emphasis on the difference between undergraduates and graduates would be appropriate.

M. Gayne asked who makes up the hearing board?

L. Sekaric responded that three people are supposed to be present at the primary hearing. They would be the student, the faculty member, and a person appointed by the hearing board. She believes that this board is the Academic Integrity Board at the college for an undergraduate or at the graduate school for the graduate student.

P. Carr added that the hearing board includes 8 students representing different the Cornell colleges.

M. Gayne argued that there should be 2 separate codes. The reason for this is that undergraduates can deal with the consequences and move forward, where if a graduate student is found guilty, it could end their career at Cornell. The university shouldn’t penalize promising students and should be taking “professionalism” into consideration.

A member asked what the penalty was for an undergraduate violation?

L. Sekaric responded it would depend on the situation, but it often means that they fail the course.

L. Sekaric announced that Dean Cohen is open to discuss this with students so if any member would like to pursue this they can speak with the Dean of Faculties office.

P. Carr announced that he would send out an email this week to coordinate a meeting later on this week to discuss the issue.

C) ILR Unionization Efforts N. Lillie, ILR grad, presented the idea to the graduate students that they get involved in a committee to form a union to bargain with the administration for benefits, pay, etc.

J. Moriarty, ILR grad, explained this seriously started at Cornell in November, after NYU. They have been meeting with specific departments to find out about graduate students’ issues and to see if a union would be the best solution. They are also looking at issues between departments. She said they have been collecting information and gathering facts thus far.

N. Lillie announced that they were here to see if they could build a positive relationship between the GPSA and the Union Organizational Committee. He thought that both organizations would be able to benefit from each other’s different connections and resources.

N. Lillie added that if anyone was interested in signing up for the mailing list or in joining the Union Organizational Committee they could go to groups.yahoo.com or email jym1@cornell.edu or nal5@cornell.edu.

J. Ward, Zoology Representative, asked where and when they meet.

N. Lillie responded that there are no regular meetings at this point but they will be posted to the site and sent out on the email mailing list.

P. Carr suggested that they contact gpsa@cornell.edu to notify the whole list.

A. Pleasant asked if there was any information on the web about this regarding how it might play out at Cornell.

N. Lillie responded that there was a national organization of graduate student union’s site that explains the process. He’d said he’d be glad to provide this to anyone interested.

D) Student Health Insurance Coverage D. Demaine, Soil, Crop, & Atmospheric Science Representative and a member of the Student Health Insurance Advisory Committee, told members he’d been contacted by P. Schloss with concerns. A related handout was distributed to members.

P. Schloss, a Ph.D. candidate in Agriculture and Biological Engineering and a member of the Cornell Coalition for Life, told members he realizes abortion is a highly controversial topic and polarizes people. He said he was not at the meeting to ask people to take a position on abortion, but to request that the freedom of students who choose not to pay for abortion through their insurance premiums be allowed to do so. He wished to make three points: 1) The current plan covers the first $300 of elective termination of pregnancy. It does not cover many elective procedures, such as cosmetic surgery, hair replacement, or experimental procedures. The Student Health Insurance Plan (SHIP) handbook clearly states abortion is an elective procedure and as such, he argued it should also not be covered. 2) Next year most grad students will be covered under SHIP. Faculty and tuition paying students will not be given a choice but to pay for this and they may be unable to choose another insurance plan for several reasons. 3) All students deserve the right to practice their religions and beliefs. He felt they should be allowed to choose not to subsidize the cost of abortions.

P. Schloss asked that the GPSA poll their constituents and express their thoughts to D. Demaine and perhaps forward those to the SHIP committee.

D. Demaine announced that the handout distributed earlier was a resolution written by the SA. He felt it outlined the main concerns and points this group was being asked to consider. Since the COR group doesn’t vote, he was hoping to use this meeting to provide information to members and ask for people to poll their constituents.

L. Fletcher, Neurobiology Representative, asked where to send the results of the polls.

D. Demaine requested that comments be sent to him via email at DCD8@cornell.edu. He would like to know if people feel this is an appropriate way to handle this concern.

A member asked to clarify what question would be asked in the poll. Is the question: 1) Is abortion being singled out in the poll? Or, 2) will student governance talk about whether students can selectively or not support any elective surgeries?

D. Demaine replied that his conversations with P. Schloss have led him to believe that the group feels there are two possible solutions that could happen. The first is that a conscience clause could be used. This conscience clause would somehow allow students to symbolically detach from the position on abortion and not support it. This could possibly be done by signing a paper stating this stance, though this option is not considered the best by the Coalition for Life. The second option would be to remove abortion from the plan entirely, and this is what the Coalition for Life is hoping would happen.

L. Sekaric proposed that, because this meeting time was close to over, they continue to discuss this issue at the GPSA meeting in 2 weeks.

V. Augusta commented that this is a big issue and deserves more time to continue to be discussed.

A member agreed and asked that it be more than a wrap up at the end of the semester.

E) Big Red Barn and Ethernet A. Saathoff reported there was were a few questions raised at the last meeting that he has gotten answered. He reported the ethernet connections would be 100-megabit connections.

K. Thompson added that the university plans to make upgrades in 3–5 years, at which time the Big Red Barn would also be upgraded at no extra cost to the GPSA or Big Red Barn. IP addresses will be available in what is called “plug and play”.

A. Saathoff said that the resolution would be brought forth at the next GPSA meeting.

L Sekaric thanked the members for their work throughout the year. She announced that everyone was welcome to attend the next GPSA meeting.

V. Adjournment

L. Sekaric adjourned the meeting at 6:02p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Melissa Carvalho, student clerk