Notes Graduate and Professional Student Assembly Council of Representatives

Big Red Barn Greenhouse March 11, 2002 5:00–6:00pm

I. Call to Order O. Salminen, the 2001–2002 GPSA Vice-President, called the meeting to order at 5:03p.m.

II. Open Forum O. Salminen presented posters advertising the upcoming election of new members for next year. She asked that members post them in departments.

S. Adam stated the student-elected trustees plan to hold a public session from 4:30–5:30 in the BRB on Thursday March 26th. This is still a tentative location, so members should watch for more information.

III. Announcements and Reports A. GPSA Update P. Carr said he met with the Dean of the Graduate School last week; there was not much new to report. He reported the GPSA passed a resolution on GPSA reorganization and he is still trying to gauge if the topic should be revisited at another meeting. He summarized that reorganization involved moving from the current cluster system to one of areas as defined by the graduate school. GPSA membership would have three seats for humanities, three for biological sciences, three for social sciences and four for physical sciences. He asked if there were comments.

V. Augusta said she was concerned with giving four seats to the physical sciences. Social sciences and humanities have similar issues; women in physical sciences are often underrepresented. She noted it seemed there was dissatisfaction with the final outcome as people left the last GPSA meeting.

P. Carr acknowledged if members felt there was a huge discrepancy that it should be fixed. He could put it on the agenda for the next meeting.

J. Sebastian questioned how COR members felt.

A member stated a lack of knowledge over a large part of the controversy.

P. Carr commented the GPSA discussed ideological points with regards to GPSA membership and came up with a compromise in the middle.

D. Toomey stated he thought the discussion wasn’t complete. He felt they should revisit the topic.

S. Adam remarked the change to area from the cluster system was agreeable to all. The debate seemed to focus over how representation will be split between the areas.

P. Carr summarized there are more students in engineering, so physical sciences was given one more vote.

A member stated she thought consensus was reached at the last COR meeting. What changed?

S. Adam said the final decision was a compromise of a 2,3,4,4 balance.

D. Demaine commented a proposal was sent out followed by general agreement. Maybe the GPSA should have taken more time to consider this.

S. Adam responded that the COR consensus seemed split and this also occurred at the GPSA meeting. He asked how COR members remember the consensus. It didn’t seem overwhelmingly one way or the other.

D. Demaine stated the real problem might be the method in which the decision was handled. It made COR members uncomfortable.

D. Brown agreed he wasn’t expecting a decision to be made at the GPSA meeting. He expressed surprise at the process and stated COR did not have enough time to think about it.

A member questioned if there was a reason to rush the decision.

P. Carr replied the GPSA didn’t want to drag the issue out.

V. Augusta agreed the GPSA took COR’s thoughts into consideration and then acted.

O. Salminen felt they didn’t have enough information; they never had clear numbers about the fields or the number of PhD’s in the different areas.

P. Carr responded the information was distributed.

A member said the election process itself was a much larger issue that needed to be addressed.

P. Carr commented he has hopes to change the election process. There will be no at-large seats; there will be four large groups. His idea is to assign four people to facilitate the election process.

A member said elections ideally wouldn’t take place the same day. It’s good to hear the election process was thought about.

P. Carr stated if anyone had a mild interest in having GPSA reorganization revisited that he could send out documentation to gpsa-l again.

A. Saathoff commented the GPSA has its own rules it must follow. This would need a 2/3 vote by the GPSA membership to reconsider or amend.

J. Wightman noted the topic should be revisited; there is much volatility in the room. Inform the members better.

D. Toomey inquired if anyone thought it shouldn’t be revisited?

Most members wanted to revisit.

A member noted he liked getting rid of the cluster system and the move to area/fields.

S. Adam said the GPSA spent almost the entire hour of their meeting on this. What does COR want?

P. Carr reminded members that full consensus is not always possible.

O. Salminen suggested revisiting the issue at the next GPSA meeting and reminded everyone that they are open meetings and everyone was welcome to attend.

B. GPSAFC Budget Process K. Hueffer announced the GPSAFC budget process has begun. A handout was distributed to members that outlined the budget process and listed some key dates. K. Hueffer elaborated:

� Budget packets are now available at the GPSAFC office in Willard Straight Hall. � A budget workshop was held on the 4th of March.. � It is not required to get handwritten signatures this spring. � Groups are strongly encouraged to get their budget packets and meet the deadlines. Don’t procrastinate. � He asked that something not be put on a budget as a special request if it is an event that happens every year. � Budget hearings would be held On April 1st, it is not necessary to be there. � Budgets are due electronically on the 27th of March. L. Geiger will send out another reminder email to groups.

K. Hueffer asked if there were any questions.

S. Adam questioned what timeframe the budget covers.

K. Hueffer responded it follows a fiscal year of September to May. There is no summer funding and the last day for special project requests is May 17th.

C. General Committee Update G. Hurley announced updates from the last General Committee meeting of the Graduate School. Two main issues discussed were that Genomics is getting new fellowships and that a pilot program on digitizing dissertations would begin. Digitizing dissertations would result in dissertations being put up on a website. Some discussion took place over having the option to suppress this PDF file for four years to get work published as there is concern publishers might not be interested if this information is already freely available.

A member questioned if the media format would replace the two hard copies currently requested. Is there a cost associated with this?

G. Hurley said he wasn’t sure.

D. Arguss said he wouldn’t want his dissertation in electronic format on the web. He said he didn’t think he could publish something in less than four years. It seemed an infringement of copyright laws.

A member suggested students should have an option.

G. Hurley said the argument is there is no legal difference between web availability and regular book access. He just wanted consensus from the group. He said he would report back to the General Committee to tell them the GPSA/COR isn’t happy with this development.

J. Wightman remarked that maybe an abstract could be made available on the web, but not the whole thing.

D. Brown commented that digitizing would be better than making a web copy. He thought students should be allowed to control this and be asked for permission to make it available.

Another member asked if Cornell currently has something that students now must sign waiving rights to their dissertation.

D. Library Commission J. Sebastian announced he was appointed to the Student Advisory Library Council. He clarified there had been some misunderstanding about what committee he’d been assigned to as there is also a Faculty Library Board, however that confusion has been cleared up. He expressed extreme dissatisfaction over the changes that occurred in Olin Library over winter break. The rearrangement of the first floor in Olin is the main problem. He reported the entire reference section was gutted; the computers now have games and dvds, and a caf� section was made. These renovations seem to appeal to undergraduates very much, however these changes are not at all conducive to any kind of serious research. The 14 day new acquisitions are in the caf� and hard to access. He is meeting with the library reps soon and asked that members send him comments regarding these changes.

IV. Business of the Day A. Social Event Planning O. Salminen announced there would be a social event hosted by GPSA/COR for the entire graduate student body this spring. A handout with suggestions for many of the party options such as preferred day of the week and possible location was distributed to members. Members were asked to indicate preferences and return responses to either O. Salminen or V. Ying. V. Ying informed members her email was VY13. Volunteers are needed to help with planning.

B. Bailey commented turnaround time is going to be needed. It is very hard to plan large events without enough lead-time and finding an appropriate space in the time left would be a challenge. She added she could help if she’s given enough time and if members are clear about what they want.

P. Carr said to make sure the expenditures are a reasonable amount.

V. Ying said it would consist of a meal and a party afterwards. At most, 200 people show up at TGIF.

B. Bailey suggested seeing if the perhaps the GPSA could co-sponsor a TGIF and then just continue the party after normal TGIF hours.

V. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:04 p.m.

Submitted,

Margaret Heavey Office of the Assemblies