RESOLUTION OF THE ENGLISH GRADUATE ORGANIZATION OF SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY IN SUPPORT OF GSOC/UAW 2110, the union of graduate student employees at New York University.
WHEREAS, the English Graduate Organization of Syracuse University is organized to provide
an inclusive, public and democratic space in which to advocate for the interests of all Syracuse English graduate students, AND
WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the English Graduate Organization of Syracuse University to
protect graduate student rights, to advocate for improved material conditions for graduate
students, to seek to uphold and protect academic freedom, to advocate for fair labor standards that do not impede rigorous graduate education, AND
WHEREAS, the above named principles, conditions, an practices lead to strong graduate
education, collegial academic departments with high morale, and improved
undergraduate education by graduate student instructors, AND
WHEREAS, GSOC/UAW 2110 has gone on strike to defend these same principles and values
and in so doing seeks to protect graduate student employee interests through a legally binding collective bargaining agreement New York University, an institution that depends on graduate student labor, AND
WHEREAS, the efforts of the administration of New York University to defeat the graduate
student union and retaliate against those who have initiated and sustained the current strike defies all protocols of civility and fairness and heralds a bellicose approach to the union and its demands for fair wages, decent health care, and provisional job security, AND
WHEREAS, the requests made by the administration of New York University upon its faculty
represent an unprecedented and dangerous infringement on departmental autonomy, AND
WHEREAS, the administration of New York University utilized information technology
such as Blackboard to engage in electronic surveillance reportedly in order to gain information about teaching staff and the status of their courses during the strike, and that the seizure of access to the communication between teaching staff and their registered students is in deepest violation of academic freedom, AND
WHEREAS, President Sexton of New York University on 28 November 2005 threatened to
rescind the Spring 2006 stipend support of striking graduate students who do not return to
the duties of their assistantships by 5 December 2005, also that such students would return to work under the proviso that striking again would disqualify them from two semesters of teaching and stipend support. AND
WHEREAS, such draconian policies and threats violate the principles of the university, violating the academic
freedom of students who have chosen to strike according to good conscience
IT IS RESOLVED that the English Graduate Organization of Syracuse University approves the actions of, and expresses solidarity with, the graduate student employees of New York University now on strike and refusing to teach, grade, advise, or perform any other duties associated with their assistantships.
*In solidarity with other groups, parts of the above were copied from written statements in support of the NYU TA's posted on www.facultydemocracy.org
PASSED 10 December 2005
December 11, 2005
December 05, 2005
Labor News At Syracuse University
A development on campus that hasn't been covered widely. . .
(from the SU News clearinghouse)
Notice the rhetorical threat of the "ominous union monster" in there? This is a clear (and common) anti-union tactic used to frighten unsure workers by encouraging them to link unions with totalitarianism in the that hope that they will instead opt for the university's proposed "good faith" model in which workers and the administration work toward mutually agreed upon goals.
A development on campus that hasn't been covered widely. . .
(from the SU News clearinghouse)
Adjunct faculty union vote begins
On Oct. 31, a petition was filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by Adjuncts United, a labor union affiliated with the New York State United Teachers Union (AU/NYSUT), seeking to represent part-time and part-time adjunct faculty members employed by Syracuse University.
In its communications with the relevant faculty members, the University has stated that it would prefer to work directly with part-time and adjunct faculty to achieve mutually agreed upon goals, without an outside organization and that it respects the right of employees to choose whether or not they are represented by a union.
Details of this ongoing process are available at: http://provost.syr.edu/unionization/unioninfo.htm.
On Dec. 5, the NLRB is sending all eligible voters a ballot, by which they may cast their vote in a secret-ballot election to indicate whether they wish to be represented by a union for purposes of collective bargaining. This election will be conducted by mail. Eligible voters are defined as: all part-time, non-tenure-track faculty members employed by the University on the University’s Syracuse, N.Y., payroll and working in Syracuse, including part-time adjunct non-tenure-track faculty members; and including such faculty members employed by University College, all professional schools and on-line instruction programs. Excluded are all full-time faculty members, tenured and tenure-track faculty members, visiting professors, research faculty members, graduate assistants, teaching assistants, research assistants and faculty members who work in dual capacity for the University, which includes supervisory, confidential and/or managerial status, confidential employees, temporary employees, managers, guards and supervisors as defined by the National Labor Relations Act, and all other employees.
The majority of the votes cast in that election will determine whether the entire eligible group is represented or not. That is, employees who vote not to be represented and employees who abstain will, regardless of their vote, be represented by the union if a majority of the votes cast favor unionization. SU urges every employee who is within the petitioned unit to vote his or her personal preference.
Ballots must be returned on or before the close of business on Dec. 19 to count in the election process. Ballots will be counted on Dec. 20 and the results will be shared immediately. Regardless of the outcome of the election, SU will continue to work toward addressing the needs of its faculty and staff, in line with the priorities and economic realities of the University.
Notice the rhetorical threat of the "ominous union monster" in there? This is a clear (and common) anti-union tactic used to frighten unsure workers by encouraging them to link unions with totalitarianism in the that hope that they will instead opt for the university's proposed "good faith" model in which workers and the administration work toward mutually agreed upon goals.
December 04, 2005
The Graduate Employee Strike At NYU
Since November, graduate student employees of NYU (TA's, GA's, RA's etc) have been on strike. NYU's GSOC was the first graduate student union to win recognition at a private univeristy. The Bush National Labor Relations Board, however, released NYU from its obligation to recognize the union. When their contract ended this year, NYU refused to recognize the union, and seeks to 'take care' of its graduate students on good faith. In the meantime, however, graduate students claim that since the end of the contract, they have seen their health care costs rise dramatically. When the strike commenced, NYU apparently engaged in ethically dubious activities to coerce graduate students back into work. It has been reported that the administration entered Blackboard course pages in an effort to discover if the GA/TA in question had suspended courses. This is an incomplete account of the events, more information can be found at the GSOC webpage here.
Recently, the president of the university issued a statement saying that graduate students who do not report back to work by December 5 will lose their stipends for the Spring semester, and further, that students who strike again will lose their assistantships. That statement is available here. These actions are being called the most draconian response to the graduate student labor movement. Judith Butler, Joan Scott, Frederic jameson, Slovoj Zizek and others have issued a statement in response and are calling for signatures on an online petition site. Their letter is also reproduced below.
EGO members may find it interesting to compare NYU's actions against the striking graduate students with former Chancellor Buzz Shaw's reaction to SU faculty that refused to cross the picket line in the 1997 service workers strike at SU. You can read about that by following the link at left for "1997 service worker strike."
By, the way, I know the guy who kinda looks like Sideshow Bob in this picture. He's a musicology PhD student. Brilliant kid.
Since November, graduate student employees of NYU (TA's, GA's, RA's etc) have been on strike. NYU's GSOC was the first graduate student union to win recognition at a private univeristy. The Bush National Labor Relations Board, however, released NYU from its obligation to recognize the union. When their contract ended this year, NYU refused to recognize the union, and seeks to 'take care' of its graduate students on good faith. In the meantime, however, graduate students claim that since the end of the contract, they have seen their health care costs rise dramatically. When the strike commenced, NYU apparently engaged in ethically dubious activities to coerce graduate students back into work. It has been reported that the administration entered Blackboard course pages in an effort to discover if the GA/TA in question had suspended courses. This is an incomplete account of the events, more information can be found at the GSOC webpage here.
Recently, the president of the university issued a statement saying that graduate students who do not report back to work by December 5 will lose their stipends for the Spring semester, and further, that students who strike again will lose their assistantships. That statement is available here. These actions are being called the most draconian response to the graduate student labor movement. Judith Butler, Joan Scott, Frederic jameson, Slovoj Zizek and others have issued a statement in response and are calling for signatures on an online petition site. Their letter is also reproduced below.
To: President John Sexton, NYU
December 2, 2005
John Sexton
President, New York University
We, the undersigned faculty from several universities in the United States and abroad, write to express our objections to the New York University administration's efforts to defeat the graduate student union and retaliate against those who have initiated and sustained the current strike. The union in question was clearly instated on the basis of a fair election which then obligated New York University to negotiate with the appointed representatives in a fair and open manner. Although the NLRB in 2005 released the university from its obligations to recognize the union, it did not authorize retaliatory action on the part of the university.The recent actions of your office, now widely publicized, defy all protocols of civility and fairness and herald a bellicose approach to the union and its demands for fair wages, decent health care, and provisional job security.
As we all know, there may be differences of opinion on how best to formulate policies that would address these various issues, but undermining the union itself is nothing more than Reagan-esque union-busting and so conveys and enacts hostility to student labor that can only heighten conflict and circulate a ruinous image for New York University as an unfair and indecent place of employment. The infiltration of student and faculty email constitutes an unauthorized invasion of privacy.And the most recent threat to rescind funding for students engaged in the strike constitutes an abhorrent form of coercion.
We urge you to enter into negotiations with the union and to find civil, legal, and productive ways of resolving whatever issues of employment exist between these two parties.
Sincerely,
Judith Butler, Maxine Elliot Professor, University of California, Berkeley
Fredric Jameson, William A. Lane Professor of Comparative Literature and Romance Studies, Duke University
Joan W. Scott, Harold F. Linder Professer of Social Science, Institute for Advanced Study
Talal Asad, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology, City University of New York
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Avalon Foundation Professor in the Humanities, Columbia University
Paul Gilroy, Anthony Giddens Professors of Social Theory, London School of Economics
Donna Haraway, Professor of History of Consciousness, University of California at Santa Cruz
Slavoj Zizek, Co-Director International Center for Humanities Birkbeck College, University of London
Etienne Balibar, Professeur emeritus, Université de Paris X Nanterre, Distinguished Professor of Humanities, University of California, Irvine
EGO members may find it interesting to compare NYU's actions against the striking graduate students with former Chancellor Buzz Shaw's reaction to SU faculty that refused to cross the picket line in the 1997 service workers strike at SU. You can read about that by following the link at left for "1997 service worker strike."
By, the way, I know the guy who kinda looks like Sideshow Bob in this picture. He's a musicology PhD student. Brilliant kid.
November 10, 2005
Judith Butler Field Trip
On Thursday November 10th a contingent of 14 grad students went to Cornell University to hear Professor Judith Butler deliver a lecture entitled "Toward a Critique of Violence." Professor Butler presented ways for thinking justice outside revenge killing and discussed the Isaeli state, Levinas, and a little Benjamin. After the lecture, the crew moved to Ithaca's Collegetown for dinner at Ruloffs. Pictures from Nate's cell phone to come.
UPDATE: Cornell Daily Sun News Coverage
Butler Asks for Mideast Dialogue
November 11, 2005
by Samantha Henig
Sun Staff Writer
Judith Butler’s talk yesterday afternoon surprised on two counts. First, there was the fact that the talk, ambiguously titled “Violence, Non-Violence” and delivered by a woman renowned for her work on gender theory, was actually about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Second, her presentation and the audience questions that followed employed the kind of calm, removed and intellectual language that, though common in academia, came as a shock for a subject that typically makes blood pressures and speaking volumes soar.
This is Butler’s first visit to Cornell as an A.D. White Professor-at-Large.
Prof. Jonathan Culler, chair of the English department, introduced her as an especially appropriate pick for the position because “far more than most academics, she is a professor who has been at large in the world, ranging freely outside the academic world.”
He noted that in addition to being a prolific and respected scholar in the United States, Butler “has also become a major public intellectual in Europe — even in France!”
Butler began by warning the audience of a couple hundred that her talk would deviate from her more typical subject matter.
“If you know me at all — or know this thing called ‘Judith Butler’ — it may be that you know me through my work on gender studies,” she said. “But for now I am interested in pursing Jewish ethics.”
As she spoke, Butler’s face was barely visible over the large wooden podium before her, but her presence nonetheless loomed large.
Calling for an open intellectual discourse about Israel, Butler lamented the strong emotions and stigmas that normally stifle such discussions. She said that many Jews feel as though they cannot express discontentment with Israel without first renouncing their Judaism, and that those who do are all too often labeled “self-hating Jews.”
She herself has fallen subject to the latter: “There are loads of Web sites that keep lists of all of the self-hating Jews and I think that I’ve made all of them,” she said.
Butler engaged the works of Edward Said, Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas to explore identity in Israeli-Palestinian relations. In particular, she questioned Levinas’ claim that persecution is the core both of Judaism and of Israel.
Butler takes issue with “the idea that you can be persecuted for all of history without ever being viewed as the persecutor.” Such an interpretation, she argued, puts Jews in a position where they can always present their actions as self-defense, and thus never be blamed as the aggressors.
Butler also criticized Levinas’ disinterest in engaging with Muslims. She told a story of Levinas meeting with the late Pope John Paul II and the prominent anthropologist Clifford Geertz. When the Pope asked the men if it is possible to create dialogue among Christians, Jews and Muslims, Levinas responded that it would only be possible among Christians and Jews.
In addition to condemning those who dismiss Islam as a religion, Butler also questioned people who want to withhold rights from Palestinians to prevent them from outnumbering and overpowering the Jews.
“I want to call into question why the demographic advantage has to be preserved as a part of Zionism. It wasn’t always that way,” she said.
One audience member asked Butler under what conditions violence is justified, to which she responded that she is “not an absolutist in my ostensible passivism."
Rather, she said she was mostly interested in arguing against revenge theory and questioning a state that would work to preclude the citizenship of certain groups.
Butler closed by urging people to come to her seminar today at 10 a.m. in Barnes Auditorium.
The auditorium was abuzz with discussion long after Butler stepped out from behind the dwarfing podium.
“She really embodies the role of public intellectual in the way that she brings her academic practice out to address current political concerns,” said Theo Hummer grad.
Ashley Puig Hertz grad also commented on Butler’s choice to apply her more abstract theories to current controversies. “She was talking about very charged, controversial issues, and discussing them in a way that was very enlightening,” she said.
Prof. Stuart Davis, English, said all he had to say was that “she was in rare and beautiful form.”
On Thursday November 10th a contingent of 14 grad students went to Cornell University to hear Professor Judith Butler deliver a lecture entitled "Toward a Critique of Violence." Professor Butler presented ways for thinking justice outside revenge killing and discussed the Isaeli state, Levinas, and a little Benjamin. After the lecture, the crew moved to Ithaca's Collegetown for dinner at Ruloffs. Pictures from Nate's cell phone to come.
UPDATE: Cornell Daily Sun News Coverage
Butler Asks for Mideast Dialogue
November 11, 2005
by Samantha Henig
Sun Staff Writer
Judith Butler’s talk yesterday afternoon surprised on two counts. First, there was the fact that the talk, ambiguously titled “Violence, Non-Violence” and delivered by a woman renowned for her work on gender theory, was actually about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Second, her presentation and the audience questions that followed employed the kind of calm, removed and intellectual language that, though common in academia, came as a shock for a subject that typically makes blood pressures and speaking volumes soar.
This is Butler’s first visit to Cornell as an A.D. White Professor-at-Large.
Prof. Jonathan Culler, chair of the English department, introduced her as an especially appropriate pick for the position because “far more than most academics, she is a professor who has been at large in the world, ranging freely outside the academic world.”
He noted that in addition to being a prolific and respected scholar in the United States, Butler “has also become a major public intellectual in Europe — even in France!”
Butler began by warning the audience of a couple hundred that her talk would deviate from her more typical subject matter.
“If you know me at all — or know this thing called ‘Judith Butler’ — it may be that you know me through my work on gender studies,” she said. “But for now I am interested in pursing Jewish ethics.”
As she spoke, Butler’s face was barely visible over the large wooden podium before her, but her presence nonetheless loomed large.
Calling for an open intellectual discourse about Israel, Butler lamented the strong emotions and stigmas that normally stifle such discussions. She said that many Jews feel as though they cannot express discontentment with Israel without first renouncing their Judaism, and that those who do are all too often labeled “self-hating Jews.”
She herself has fallen subject to the latter: “There are loads of Web sites that keep lists of all of the self-hating Jews and I think that I’ve made all of them,” she said.
Butler engaged the works of Edward Said, Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas to explore identity in Israeli-Palestinian relations. In particular, she questioned Levinas’ claim that persecution is the core both of Judaism and of Israel.
Butler takes issue with “the idea that you can be persecuted for all of history without ever being viewed as the persecutor.” Such an interpretation, she argued, puts Jews in a position where they can always present their actions as self-defense, and thus never be blamed as the aggressors.
Butler also criticized Levinas’ disinterest in engaging with Muslims. She told a story of Levinas meeting with the late Pope John Paul II and the prominent anthropologist Clifford Geertz. When the Pope asked the men if it is possible to create dialogue among Christians, Jews and Muslims, Levinas responded that it would only be possible among Christians and Jews.
In addition to condemning those who dismiss Islam as a religion, Butler also questioned people who want to withhold rights from Palestinians to prevent them from outnumbering and overpowering the Jews.
“I want to call into question why the demographic advantage has to be preserved as a part of Zionism. It wasn’t always that way,” she said.
One audience member asked Butler under what conditions violence is justified, to which she responded that she is “not an absolutist in my ostensible passivism."
Rather, she said she was mostly interested in arguing against revenge theory and questioning a state that would work to preclude the citizenship of certain groups.
Butler closed by urging people to come to her seminar today at 10 a.m. in Barnes Auditorium.
The auditorium was abuzz with discussion long after Butler stepped out from behind the dwarfing podium.
“She really embodies the role of public intellectual in the way that she brings her academic practice out to address current political concerns,” said Theo Hummer grad.
Ashley Puig Hertz grad also commented on Butler’s choice to apply her more abstract theories to current controversies. “She was talking about very charged, controversial issues, and discussing them in a way that was very enlightening,” she said.
Prof. Stuart Davis, English, said all he had to say was that “she was in rare and beautiful form.”
October 30, 2005
October 06, 2005
October 04, 2005
Annual Stephen Crane Lecture Scheduled, Graduate Students Encouraged to Attend
”The Body Count: Stephen Crane and the Cost of War.”
I am writing on behalf of my colleagues to invite you to the upcoming Stephen Crane Memorial Lecture, hosted annually by the English Department and the Dikaia Foundation. We are honored this year to have Cindy A. Weinstein, Professor of English at California Institute of Technology, give this year’s lecture. She will speak at 4 p.m. on October 19th in Room 208 of the Goldstein Alumni and Faculty Center. The title of her talk is ”The Body Count: Stephen Crane and the Cost of War.”
A member of the faculty in Cal Tech’s Division of Humanities and Social Sciences, Professor Weinstein is widely recognized for her work in nineteenth-century American literature. The Literature of Labor and the Labors of Literature traces the intersections of aesthetic and economic discourse in nineteenth-century America. Her most recent book, Family, Kinship, and Sympathy in Nineteenth-Century American Literature, published by Cambridge University Press in 2004, argues that the cultural achievement of the enormously popular sentimental fictions of the mid-nineteenth century was to challenge the very constitution of the bourgeois family, substituting love for consanguinity, contract for biology. Professor Weinstein is currently at work on Narratives, Numbers, and Pictures: From Poe to Dos Passos, the project from which her lecture will be drawn. In this moment when counting the bodies, whether of the Iraqi dead or those lost in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, is a matter of serious political and ethical debate, Professor Weinstein’s inquiry into the question of numbers—of who is counting and who counts—in the work of late nineteenth century writers is an unusually timely one. Like last year’s Crane Lecture by Cecelia Tichi, Weinstein’s talk promises to focus on the ways in which writers use narrative to confront issues of urgent civic importance and to confirm the vital public import of scholarship in the humanities.
The Stephen Crane Memorial Lecture series is made possible by the generosity of the Dikaia Foundation. It commemorates the achievements of Stephen Crane, who attended Syracuse University in 1891 and was a member of the Delta Upsilon Fraternity from which the Dikaia Foundation derives. We are very pleased that a scholar of Crane and his generation of U.S. writers of Professor Weinstein’s prominence will address us on this special occasion.
We hope you will join us for Professor Weinstein’s lecture and at the reception following it.
Sincerely,
Amy Schrager Lang
Professor of English and Humanities
”The Body Count: Stephen Crane and the Cost of War.”
I am writing on behalf of my colleagues to invite you to the upcoming Stephen Crane Memorial Lecture, hosted annually by the English Department and the Dikaia Foundation. We are honored this year to have Cindy A. Weinstein, Professor of English at California Institute of Technology, give this year’s lecture. She will speak at 4 p.m. on October 19th in Room 208 of the Goldstein Alumni and Faculty Center. The title of her talk is ”The Body Count: Stephen Crane and the Cost of War.”
A member of the faculty in Cal Tech’s Division of Humanities and Social Sciences, Professor Weinstein is widely recognized for her work in nineteenth-century American literature. The Literature of Labor and the Labors of Literature traces the intersections of aesthetic and economic discourse in nineteenth-century America. Her most recent book, Family, Kinship, and Sympathy in Nineteenth-Century American Literature, published by Cambridge University Press in 2004, argues that the cultural achievement of the enormously popular sentimental fictions of the mid-nineteenth century was to challenge the very constitution of the bourgeois family, substituting love for consanguinity, contract for biology. Professor Weinstein is currently at work on Narratives, Numbers, and Pictures: From Poe to Dos Passos, the project from which her lecture will be drawn. In this moment when counting the bodies, whether of the Iraqi dead or those lost in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, is a matter of serious political and ethical debate, Professor Weinstein’s inquiry into the question of numbers—of who is counting and who counts—in the work of late nineteenth century writers is an unusually timely one. Like last year’s Crane Lecture by Cecelia Tichi, Weinstein’s talk promises to focus on the ways in which writers use narrative to confront issues of urgent civic importance and to confirm the vital public import of scholarship in the humanities.
The Stephen Crane Memorial Lecture series is made possible by the generosity of the Dikaia Foundation. It commemorates the achievements of Stephen Crane, who attended Syracuse University in 1891 and was a member of the Delta Upsilon Fraternity from which the Dikaia Foundation derives. We are very pleased that a scholar of Crane and his generation of U.S. writers of Professor Weinstein’s prominence will address us on this special occasion.
We hope you will join us for Professor Weinstein’s lecture and at the reception following it.
Sincerely,
Amy Schrager Lang
Professor of English and Humanities
October 03, 2005
SuperEGO Soccer Club's Passionate Effort Ends in Heartbreaking Defeat
SuperEGO, the English Dept intramural soccer team, dropped a heartbreaking loss to the Rancho Carne Toros
on Sunday night, surrendering a goal in the final minute and losing, 3-2.
After absorbing some early pressure, EGO struck first in the match. John Henderson & Ben Krier helped to
set up the sequence that ended with Michael Montero slipping the ball past the Toros keeper to take a 1-0
lead.
The SuperEGO defense, anchored by Meghan Boyle, stood up to the task of defending the lead. John Henderson
and Laura Winkiel frustrated their opponents with some stingy defense on the wings, and producing some
counter-attacks. Late in the period, Mike Dwyer was sprung on a breakaway, but came up empty as the
opposing keeper made the save. Cruelly, the Toros were able to equalize on a long-distance shot, just before
halftime.
The second half started unevenly, when goalie Mike O'Connor was tested several times. Save after save
was coaxed out of O'Connor, when finally a busted play (and dubious offside non-call) gave the Toros a 2-1
lead.
EGO struck right back on the ensuing kickoff. Some clever combination play between Ben Krier and Mike
Dwyer brought the equalizer within seconds, leveling the score at 2-2.
The rest game was a very even affair, with both sides playing tight defense and making the most of their
chances. EGO's defense tightened up, with strong efforts from Amata Schneider-Ludorff and Ali Hasan in
the defensive third.
With the clock winding down and fatigue setting in, it
was the Toros who mounted one last attack. A shot
from outside the box just escaped O'Connor's reach to
give the Toros the gamewinner with just 38 seconds
left to play.
One final SuperEGO attack was stymied when Michael Montero's shot was blocked by the defense. Still, it
was a valiant effort, and a whole lot of fun. Thanks to everyone that came out to play or just came to
watch. Next game is Tuesday Oct 11 at 9:45 pm!
Forza SuperEGO!
SuperEGO, the English Dept intramural soccer team, dropped a heartbreaking loss to the Rancho Carne Toros
on Sunday night, surrendering a goal in the final minute and losing, 3-2.
After absorbing some early pressure, EGO struck first in the match. John Henderson & Ben Krier helped to
set up the sequence that ended with Michael Montero slipping the ball past the Toros keeper to take a 1-0
lead.
The SuperEGO defense, anchored by Meghan Boyle, stood up to the task of defending the lead. John Henderson
and Laura Winkiel frustrated their opponents with some stingy defense on the wings, and producing some
counter-attacks. Late in the period, Mike Dwyer was sprung on a breakaway, but came up empty as the
opposing keeper made the save. Cruelly, the Toros were able to equalize on a long-distance shot, just before
halftime.
The second half started unevenly, when goalie Mike O'Connor was tested several times. Save after save
was coaxed out of O'Connor, when finally a busted play (and dubious offside non-call) gave the Toros a 2-1
lead.
EGO struck right back on the ensuing kickoff. Some clever combination play between Ben Krier and Mike
Dwyer brought the equalizer within seconds, leveling the score at 2-2.
The rest game was a very even affair, with both sides playing tight defense and making the most of their
chances. EGO's defense tightened up, with strong efforts from Amata Schneider-Ludorff and Ali Hasan in
the defensive third.
With the clock winding down and fatigue setting in, it
was the Toros who mounted one last attack. A shot
from outside the box just escaped O'Connor's reach to
give the Toros the gamewinner with just 38 seconds
left to play.
One final SuperEGO attack was stymied when Michael Montero's shot was blocked by the defense. Still, it
was a valiant effort, and a whole lot of fun. Thanks to everyone that came out to play or just came to
watch. Next game is Tuesday Oct 11 at 9:45 pm!
Forza SuperEGO!
September 25, 2005
September 20, 2005
September 19, 2005
EGO Restarts "Negotiations" Graduate Student Paper Series
On September 29th, the English Graduate Organization will host the first in an ongoing series of graduate student paper readings. Mike Dwyer will read from his work on Hitchcock, Nate Mills on Mike Gold, and Jon Senchyne on E.E. Cummings. The reading will be held in the Killian Room of the Hall of Languages and will run from 5:00 - 6:30 PM.
MA and PhD students can email Jon Senchyne if they would like to read from their work at future Negotiations readings. This is a great way for all of us to learn more about what our contemporaries are doing, to engage in questions that may have grown out of shared coursework, and -for new students especially- to learn about what type of papers come out of seminar work. Some students are also preparing to deliver papers at conferences around the country this year - this is a great way to practice your reading and to answer some questions from the floor.
On September 29th, the English Graduate Organization will host the first in an ongoing series of graduate student paper readings. Mike Dwyer will read from his work on Hitchcock, Nate Mills on Mike Gold, and Jon Senchyne on E.E. Cummings. The reading will be held in the Killian Room of the Hall of Languages and will run from 5:00 - 6:30 PM.
MA and PhD students can email Jon Senchyne if they would like to read from their work at future Negotiations readings. This is a great way for all of us to learn more about what our contemporaries are doing, to engage in questions that may have grown out of shared coursework, and -for new students especially- to learn about what type of papers come out of seminar work. Some students are also preparing to deliver papers at conferences around the country this year - this is a great way to practice your reading and to answer some questions from the floor.
September 16, 2005
EGO Trivia Team
As some of you might know the graduate student organization subsidizes a bar on South Campus called the Inn Complete. On Thursday nights they run a pub trivia competition. EGO entered its first team last night and scored 110 points tying for 4th with about 10 other teams. But - the score tally is cumulative over the entire semester, and if we get some more people out there next week - especially those whose knowledge of oddities and pop culture history of the 30s and 40s is unendingly vast, someone whose last name rhymes with "Real" - then we might have a chance at the semester title if we keep winning. Plus the soda, beer, and food are really cheap.
As some of you might know the graduate student organization subsidizes a bar on South Campus called the Inn Complete. On Thursday nights they run a pub trivia competition. EGO entered its first team last night and scored 110 points tying for 4th with about 10 other teams. But - the score tally is cumulative over the entire semester, and if we get some more people out there next week - especially those whose knowledge of oddities and pop culture history of the 30s and 40s is unendingly vast, someone whose last name rhymes with "Real" - then we might have a chance at the semester title if we keep winning. Plus the soda, beer, and food are really cheap.
September 14, 2005
Congratulations to Andrew Leal
Congratulations to one of our newest. In addition to being our official
balloon animal artist, 1st year MA student Andrew Leal's co-authored book THE ANIMATED MOVIE GUIDE arrived today. Andrew wrote over 50 entries for the collection whose main editor is Jerry Beck. The book was published by The Chicago Review Press.
From the jacket:
"Here for the first time in print, is an accurate and complete guide to every
animated movie ever released in the United States. This lavishly illustrated companion traces the origin of the art form,
discusses what it takes to make a great animated feature, and guides the reader through all manner of hits and flops that make up this previously uncharted world. Every film listing includes reviews, four star ratings, background information, plot synopses, accurate running times, consumer tips, and MPAA ratings.
Going beyond the box-office hits of Disney and Dreamworks, this guide to every animated movie ever released in the United States covers more than 300 films over the course of nearly 80 years of film history. Well-known films such as Finding Nemo and Shrek are profiled and hundreds of other films, many of them rarely discussed, are analyzed, compared, and catalogued. The origin of the genre and what it takes to make a great animated feature are discussed, and the influence of Japanese animation, computer graphics, and stop-motion puppet techniques are brought into perspective. Every film analysis includes reviews, four-star ratings, background information, plot synopses, accurate running times, consumer tips, and MPAA ratings. Brief guides to made-for-TV movies, direct-to-video releases, foreign films that were never theatrically released in the U.S., and live-action films with significant animation round out the volume."
for more: Chicago Review Press
and on Amazon.
Congratulations to one of our newest. In addition to being our official
balloon animal artist, 1st year MA student Andrew Leal's co-authored book THE ANIMATED MOVIE GUIDE arrived today. Andrew wrote over 50 entries for the collection whose main editor is Jerry Beck. The book was published by The Chicago Review Press.
From the jacket:
"Here for the first time in print, is an accurate and complete guide to every
animated movie ever released in the United States. This lavishly illustrated companion traces the origin of the art form,
discusses what it takes to make a great animated feature, and guides the reader through all manner of hits and flops that make up this previously uncharted world. Every film listing includes reviews, four star ratings, background information, plot synopses, accurate running times, consumer tips, and MPAA ratings.
Going beyond the box-office hits of Disney and Dreamworks, this guide to every animated movie ever released in the United States covers more than 300 films over the course of nearly 80 years of film history. Well-known films such as Finding Nemo and Shrek are profiled and hundreds of other films, many of them rarely discussed, are analyzed, compared, and catalogued. The origin of the genre and what it takes to make a great animated feature are discussed, and the influence of Japanese animation, computer graphics, and stop-motion puppet techniques are brought into perspective. Every film analysis includes reviews, four-star ratings, background information, plot synopses, accurate running times, consumer tips, and MPAA ratings. Brief guides to made-for-TV movies, direct-to-video releases, foreign films that were never theatrically released in the U.S., and live-action films with significant animation round out the volume."
for more: Chicago Review Press
and on Amazon.
September 13, 2005
Cristina's Party
Cristina's Party (updated)
It's time to move the debauchery (and balloon animals!) downtown.
In keeping with the new department tradition of a party every weekend, Nate and I will be hosting one this weekend.
When: Saturday, Sept 17th @ 9 pm
Where: 133 Walton St. #126.
Bring: Wine/Beer/Stoli. No need to bring food, we will provide various treats to soak up the alcohol.
Partners/lovers/crushes are welcome.
I live in the townhouses above the Lemongrass reastaurant/The Blue Tusk/Starbucks and across from the MOST. There is a walkway between the Blue Tusk and the Lemongrass restaurant and right in the middle of it, next door to the Tusk, is a green door. Buzzers are next to it. Take the elevator to the 2nd floor. Turn right. Walk to the end of the courtyard. My townhouse will be on your right, #126. If you get lost, call (473 9897) and we will send a guide. Or ask Alex at the newstand to direct you.
You can park on the street or in the underground parking garage (next door to the Lemongrass). Cab rides from the university area to downtown are around $5, and it's super easy to find cabs down here Friday nights for your return trip. Just in case you're planning on drinking.
Nate-Please forward this to Ali and insist he comes. It can't be a man's world without him.
Andrew-We will have Canada Dry for you.
Brigitte-I know you will be out of town, but please tell your partner to come.
Vanessa-I will have a bottle of white Bordeaux just for you.
It is not necessary, but I would appreciate it if you could RSVP so we know how much food to make and I can start Martha Stewart-ing out.
Cristina
Cristina's Party (updated)
It's time to move the debauchery (and balloon animals!) downtown.
In keeping with the new department tradition of a party every weekend, Nate and I will be hosting one this weekend.
When: Saturday, Sept 17th @ 9 pm
Where: 133 Walton St. #126.
Bring: Wine/Beer/Stoli. No need to bring food, we will provide various treats to soak up the alcohol.
Partners/lovers/crushes are welcome.
I live in the townhouses above the Lemongrass reastaurant/The Blue Tusk/Starbucks and across from the MOST. There is a walkway between the Blue Tusk and the Lemongrass restaurant and right in the middle of it, next door to the Tusk, is a green door. Buzzers are next to it. Take the elevator to the 2nd floor. Turn right. Walk to the end of the courtyard. My townhouse will be on your right, #126. If you get lost, call (473 9897) and we will send a guide. Or ask Alex at the newstand to direct you.
You can park on the street or in the underground parking garage (next door to the Lemongrass). Cab rides from the university area to downtown are around $5, and it's super easy to find cabs down here Friday nights for your return trip. Just in case you're planning on drinking.
Nate-Please forward this to Ali and insist he comes. It can't be a man's world without him.
Andrew-We will have Canada Dry for you.
Brigitte-I know you will be out of town, but please tell your partner to come.
Vanessa-I will have a bottle of white Bordeaux just for you.
It is not necessary, but I would appreciate it if you could RSVP so we know how much food to make and I can start Martha Stewart-ing out.
Cristina
Dates, Time, and Location of Department Assembly Meetings - FALL 2005
The following is copied from a Memo sent by G. Lambert, Chair to the faculty, 16 August 05:
Assembly Meetings & Committees 05-06: Assembly meetings will take place on the third Wednesday of each month, between 10-30-12:00pm, except where there is a conflict in room assignment. I will request that Chairs of the undergraduate and graduate committees schedule meetings on alternative Wednesdays, during the same time period, and the English Library will be available at the beginning the semester and through the year. I will soon be distributing the sign-up sheet for faculty service; all new faculty, as well as part-time faculty, are excused from serving on a committee the first year of their appointment. Of course, regular part-time faculty have no service requirement, unless they choose to volunteer. However, given the motion to amend the department’s committee structure, in its first meeting I will ask the Agenda only to appoint members of the undergraduate and graduate committees. Finally, I have also scheduled a meeting for the Promotion & Tenure Committee this fall in order to review procedures and make any revisions to the process, as well as to organize and prepare for several cases that we have upcoming in the next year. Please see attached schedule mark your calendar and plan to attend these meetings where we conduct all the important business of the department.
(emphasis added)
The following is copied from a Memo sent by G. Lambert, Chair to the faculty, 16 August 05:
Assembly Meetings & Committees 05-06: Assembly meetings will take place on the third Wednesday of each month, between 10-30-12:00pm, except where there is a conflict in room assignment. I will request that Chairs of the undergraduate and graduate committees schedule meetings on alternative Wednesdays, during the same time period, and the English Library will be available at the beginning the semester and through the year. I will soon be distributing the sign-up sheet for faculty service; all new faculty, as well as part-time faculty, are excused from serving on a committee the first year of their appointment. Of course, regular part-time faculty have no service requirement, unless they choose to volunteer. However, given the motion to amend the department’s committee structure, in its first meeting I will ask the Agenda only to appoint members of the undergraduate and graduate committees. Finally, I have also scheduled a meeting for the Promotion & Tenure Committee this fall in order to review procedures and make any revisions to the process, as well as to organize and prepare for several cases that we have upcoming in the next year. Please see attached schedule mark your calendar and plan to attend these meetings where we conduct all the important business of the department.
(emphasis added)
September 09, 2005
Uncorrected EGO Meeting Minutes 9 September 2005
EGO Meeting Minutes - 9/9/2005
Present – Jon Senchyne, Rachel Collins, Mike Dwyer, Amata Schnieder-Ludorff, Christina Stasia, Mike O’Connor and the O’Connor girls, Brigitte Fielder Montero, Nate Mills, Jon Singleton, Corrine (what’s Corrine’s last name?)
1. Reports from Committees:
A. The Agenda and Faculty Development Committee reps have nothing to report.
B. The Undergraduate Committee: Nate Mills reports:
a. With the gradual retirement of Chuck Watson there are some changes in the management of the undergraduate curriculum.
b. Claudia Klaver is the new Director of Undergraduate Studies.
c. Jolynn Parker is the “ETS coordinator.” Nate was not clear exactly what this position entails, it may simply mean assistant to Claudia Klaver, or it might not.
d. There is some confusion about who English Department TA’s (PhD students teaching ETS curriculum) should report to. Is it Jolynn Parker? Is it Gregg Lambert? Nate will find out at the next Undergrad committee meeting.
C. Graduate Committee: Rachel Collins reports:
a. Amy Lang is the acting Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) for the Fall term only.
b. The grad committee’s goals for the year are threefold:
i. Find a new DGS
ii. Develop Syllabi for the proposed pro-seminars that are part of the revised graduate curriculum.
iii. Reshaping the graduate curriculum – including “marketing” the program to the outside, and trying to get at least one year of fellowship for all PhD students.
2. A motion was made to make Corrine the 1st year student representative to EGO. It passed on the floor. Corrine is the 1st year rep.
3. Jon Senchyne reports on his meeting with Gregg Lambert
A. Jon and Cristina Stasia will be meeting with Gregg at 1pm on Monday September 12th.
Upon request from EGO they will be sure to discuss:
a. The ETS TA office situation. There is some confusion about who belongs in what office, where Salt Hill is supposed to be, and getting computers fixed. We would like to know who is supposed to be where, we would like that clearly marked on doors, and to have the Apple computer fixed.
b. Improved communication about Assembly meetings, notably some kind of email confirmation about time and location.
B. Jon met with Gregg last week and discussed the following:
a. Gregg expressed some concern about EGO representatives on Department Assembly standing committees using their votes as a block. While EGO has traditionally used its 4 votes in unison to represent the collective will of EGO, Gregg feels that this was not the intention when voting rights were extended. He also said that he is aware that EGO will probably continue to function in this way. Jon and Rachel checked the EGO constitution and are confident that it is within our own guidelines to vote as a block when EGO reaches consensus. Mike Dwyer added that last year we did not vote as a block when we were not in consensus as a body politic.
b. The English Library. Once all of the furniture arrives the English library will be used for Graduate seminars, department committee meetings, ego meetings, “open time,” and Gregg will be holding a monthly graduate student luncheon (paid by the department) that will be open to all MA, PhD, and MFA students.
c. Gregg Lambert will be giving 2 of the old folding tables from HL 421 (the seminar room) to replace the missing TA desks in HBC wherever they are needed the most (and fit). Again this is contingent on the arrival of new furniture.
d. Jon and Gregg also discussed the place of MFA students within EGO. It is clear that there is an MFA student on the Creative Writing Committee, but that student is not administered through EGO. Rather it is done “in house” through the CW wing of the department. MFA at one time had their own student group, and according to Gregg Lambert, EGO was always intended to be for PhD/MA students. Now, however, MFA students are officially included in EGO membership. Jon Senchyne feels that in order to make EGO a worthwhile group for MFA students, EGO needs to in some way have an official stake in matters that would affect MFA students, something that is not possible without official representation. Jon Senchyne would prefer if the CW Committee representative was a position administered officially through EGO, elected by and reporting to EGO as the other 4 reps do. Amata expressed concern that EGO should only seek to administer this position if MFA students are unsatisfied with the current setup. The prevailing attitude is that EGO would like to involve MFA students more, but that we cannot, in general, figure out how to do so since EGO’s political power rests squarely outside of the CW wing. This contributes to the false divide between the student body.
4. “Issues”
We discussed the ETS TA office situation, computers and their repair, and getting the department to set up a list serv to notify students when and where the department assembly meetings will be. Jon and Cristina will bring this up at the Monday meeting with Gregg Lambert.
5. The EGO Listserv.
A. A motion was made to remove all those currently on the listserv who are no longer in the department. This means graduates, those who have gone to other departments, and those who have otherwise left the program. The motion passed. Given the passing of this motion, Mike Dwyer is now the only legitimate listserv administrator, and therefore will be responsible for removing all non-current English Department Graduate students from the listserv.
B. Amata strongly discourages current students from asking to be taken off the list. Though it is inconvenient to get email when one is not interested in EGO, the body still represents that person in the Assembly and in the department. There may also be a time when an issue affecting such a person arises and they otherwise would not have the opportunity to access EGO electronically. There was general agreement about this point.
6. Writing Program Representation
A. Jon Senchyne talked about the reasons EGO might want to officially request representation of MA/MFA/PhD students within the governing committees (specifically the Lower Division Committee) of the Writing Program. These include:
a. English Department MA/MFA/PhD students make up a significant percentage of the Lower Division Faculty. By Nate Mill’s estimate they are 30% of the Lower Division teaching staff.
b. English Department MA/MFA/PhD students are the only teaching constituency without this kind of representation. PWI’s and CCR students have representation.
c. English Department MA/MFA/PhD students are expected to teach the lower division curriculum that the LD committee develops, but have no role in developing it.
d. There is no clear grievance system when MA/MFA/PhD students are fired from the Writing Program – something that happens with minor frequency – and having political representation would assist in bringing such problems to the Writing Program’s attention.
B. Cristina Stasia said that we should alert Gregg Lambert if we are going to formally present a request for representation to the Writing Program so that he is not “blind sided” in the event that the Writing Program reacts negatively and comes to see him about it. Rachel is also going to alert Anne Fitzsimmons about this.
C. A motion was made to give Jon Senchyne permission to draft a letter to the Writing Program requesting representations for the reasons mentioned above. The letter will be brought before EGO, revised as the body wishes, and delivered after it has been approved by EGO at the next meeting. The motion passed.
These minutes are unedited and are subject to the approval of the EGO membership at the next meeting.
EGO Meeting Minutes - 9/9/2005
Present – Jon Senchyne, Rachel Collins, Mike Dwyer, Amata Schnieder-Ludorff, Christina Stasia, Mike O’Connor and the O’Connor girls, Brigitte Fielder Montero, Nate Mills, Jon Singleton, Corrine (what’s Corrine’s last name?)
1. Reports from Committees:
A. The Agenda and Faculty Development Committee reps have nothing to report.
B. The Undergraduate Committee: Nate Mills reports:
a. With the gradual retirement of Chuck Watson there are some changes in the management of the undergraduate curriculum.
b. Claudia Klaver is the new Director of Undergraduate Studies.
c. Jolynn Parker is the “ETS coordinator.” Nate was not clear exactly what this position entails, it may simply mean assistant to Claudia Klaver, or it might not.
d. There is some confusion about who English Department TA’s (PhD students teaching ETS curriculum) should report to. Is it Jolynn Parker? Is it Gregg Lambert? Nate will find out at the next Undergrad committee meeting.
C. Graduate Committee: Rachel Collins reports:
a. Amy Lang is the acting Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) for the Fall term only.
b. The grad committee’s goals for the year are threefold:
i. Find a new DGS
ii. Develop Syllabi for the proposed pro-seminars that are part of the revised graduate curriculum.
iii. Reshaping the graduate curriculum – including “marketing” the program to the outside, and trying to get at least one year of fellowship for all PhD students.
2. A motion was made to make Corrine the 1st year student representative to EGO. It passed on the floor. Corrine is the 1st year rep.
3. Jon Senchyne reports on his meeting with Gregg Lambert
A. Jon and Cristina Stasia will be meeting with Gregg at 1pm on Monday September 12th.
Upon request from EGO they will be sure to discuss:
a. The ETS TA office situation. There is some confusion about who belongs in what office, where Salt Hill is supposed to be, and getting computers fixed. We would like to know who is supposed to be where, we would like that clearly marked on doors, and to have the Apple computer fixed.
b. Improved communication about Assembly meetings, notably some kind of email confirmation about time and location.
B. Jon met with Gregg last week and discussed the following:
a. Gregg expressed some concern about EGO representatives on Department Assembly standing committees using their votes as a block. While EGO has traditionally used its 4 votes in unison to represent the collective will of EGO, Gregg feels that this was not the intention when voting rights were extended. He also said that he is aware that EGO will probably continue to function in this way. Jon and Rachel checked the EGO constitution and are confident that it is within our own guidelines to vote as a block when EGO reaches consensus. Mike Dwyer added that last year we did not vote as a block when we were not in consensus as a body politic.
b. The English Library. Once all of the furniture arrives the English library will be used for Graduate seminars, department committee meetings, ego meetings, “open time,” and Gregg will be holding a monthly graduate student luncheon (paid by the department) that will be open to all MA, PhD, and MFA students.
c. Gregg Lambert will be giving 2 of the old folding tables from HL 421 (the seminar room) to replace the missing TA desks in HBC wherever they are needed the most (and fit). Again this is contingent on the arrival of new furniture.
d. Jon and Gregg also discussed the place of MFA students within EGO. It is clear that there is an MFA student on the Creative Writing Committee, but that student is not administered through EGO. Rather it is done “in house” through the CW wing of the department. MFA at one time had their own student group, and according to Gregg Lambert, EGO was always intended to be for PhD/MA students. Now, however, MFA students are officially included in EGO membership. Jon Senchyne feels that in order to make EGO a worthwhile group for MFA students, EGO needs to in some way have an official stake in matters that would affect MFA students, something that is not possible without official representation. Jon Senchyne would prefer if the CW Committee representative was a position administered officially through EGO, elected by and reporting to EGO as the other 4 reps do. Amata expressed concern that EGO should only seek to administer this position if MFA students are unsatisfied with the current setup. The prevailing attitude is that EGO would like to involve MFA students more, but that we cannot, in general, figure out how to do so since EGO’s political power rests squarely outside of the CW wing. This contributes to the false divide between the student body.
4. “Issues”
We discussed the ETS TA office situation, computers and their repair, and getting the department to set up a list serv to notify students when and where the department assembly meetings will be. Jon and Cristina will bring this up at the Monday meeting with Gregg Lambert.
5. The EGO Listserv.
A. A motion was made to remove all those currently on the listserv who are no longer in the department. This means graduates, those who have gone to other departments, and those who have otherwise left the program. The motion passed. Given the passing of this motion, Mike Dwyer is now the only legitimate listserv administrator, and therefore will be responsible for removing all non-current English Department Graduate students from the listserv.
B. Amata strongly discourages current students from asking to be taken off the list. Though it is inconvenient to get email when one is not interested in EGO, the body still represents that person in the Assembly and in the department. There may also be a time when an issue affecting such a person arises and they otherwise would not have the opportunity to access EGO electronically. There was general agreement about this point.
6. Writing Program Representation
A. Jon Senchyne talked about the reasons EGO might want to officially request representation of MA/MFA/PhD students within the governing committees (specifically the Lower Division Committee) of the Writing Program. These include:
a. English Department MA/MFA/PhD students make up a significant percentage of the Lower Division Faculty. By Nate Mill’s estimate they are 30% of the Lower Division teaching staff.
b. English Department MA/MFA/PhD students are the only teaching constituency without this kind of representation. PWI’s and CCR students have representation.
c. English Department MA/MFA/PhD students are expected to teach the lower division curriculum that the LD committee develops, but have no role in developing it.
d. There is no clear grievance system when MA/MFA/PhD students are fired from the Writing Program – something that happens with minor frequency – and having political representation would assist in bringing such problems to the Writing Program’s attention.
B. Cristina Stasia said that we should alert Gregg Lambert if we are going to formally present a request for representation to the Writing Program so that he is not “blind sided” in the event that the Writing Program reacts negatively and comes to see him about it. Rachel is also going to alert Anne Fitzsimmons about this.
C. A motion was made to give Jon Senchyne permission to draft a letter to the Writing Program requesting representations for the reasons mentioned above. The letter will be brought before EGO, revised as the body wishes, and delivered after it has been approved by EGO at the next meeting. The motion passed.
These minutes are unedited and are subject to the approval of the EGO membership at the next meeting.
Correction To Minutes of 9/9/05
Clarification on Jolynn Parker, just so I don't seem as incompetent as the
minutes suggest. Jolynn's position as "ETS Coordinator" has yet to be fully
defined, as the position was only just created this year. Jolynn will assist
Claudia in directing the undergraduate program (which Chuck apparently had
down to a science since he had been doing it so long), will act as a liasion
between the department and the honors program, the DIPA program etc, and will
handle much of the paperwork and bureacracy surrounding the ETS major:
proposals for new courses, sheparding curriculum changes through the
University Senate, etc.
If there is significant concern over this, I can try to arrange to have Jolynn
and or Claudia address EGO in order to clarify how the new governance
structure will work.
My understanding is that Claudia, as ETS director, will still do the bulk of
the overseeing of Phd teaching, though I imagine any PhD instructor will have
significant contact with Jolynn as well. I will clarify this point, as Jon's
minutes indicate, at the next meeting. For right now, I would suggest that any
PhD instructor who has any sort of issue to be addressed by the department
regarding ETS teaching contact Claudia.
Thanks,
nate
Clarification on Jolynn Parker, just so I don't seem as incompetent as the
minutes suggest. Jolynn's position as "ETS Coordinator" has yet to be fully
defined, as the position was only just created this year. Jolynn will assist
Claudia in directing the undergraduate program (which Chuck apparently had
down to a science since he had been doing it so long), will act as a liasion
between the department and the honors program, the DIPA program etc, and will
handle much of the paperwork and bureacracy surrounding the ETS major:
proposals for new courses, sheparding curriculum changes through the
University Senate, etc.
If there is significant concern over this, I can try to arrange to have Jolynn
and or Claudia address EGO in order to clarify how the new governance
structure will work.
My understanding is that Claudia, as ETS director, will still do the bulk of
the overseeing of Phd teaching, though I imagine any PhD instructor will have
significant contact with Jolynn as well. I will clarify this point, as Jon's
minutes indicate, at the next meeting. For right now, I would suggest that any
PhD instructor who has any sort of issue to be addressed by the department
regarding ETS teaching contact Claudia.
Thanks,
nate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
