April 1st—
Rep Reports
CW: 201 undergrad course, workshop model vs. regular, sixteen-week course model—scheduling is easier (from dept’s perspective) if it’s a standard course—(undergrad) student perspective, scheduling is more important than sticking with workshop model—grad students, however, were not informed of the change, transparency issue—best way to go about disputing the change: write letters to various administrators, meeting w/ Lee is in the works, will explain dept’s perspective in more detail—@ the dept. meeting: problems with undergrad retention, the non-standard issue is a real thing—300/400 level courses will not change, but 200-level courses have the potential for attracting/retaining students—Lynda’s been collecting data w/ regard to undergrad experiences in the department, students are discouraged by scheduling issues—research, peer institutions: not uncommon to have class 2-3 days per week—ultimately: grad students have priority for one-day-a-week courses, then 300/400 levels, and so on—the biggest issue here is with transparency—CW grad students argue that they won’t be able to conduct effective, thorough workshops with only 50 min/75 min per class period—also, should be support/training for grad students expected to teach w/ new schedule (Madelyn); another CW issue from the previous meeting: professional development positions for credit?—Lee provided Madelyn w/ some history/background: a few years ago CW grad program narrowed acceptance from 20 to 12, therefore less people to sign up for grad workshops and they need to fill the seats, courses always on the verge of not making
CO-CHAIRS: meeting w/ Lee, no updates on the pink hotel—prison teaching initiative, sending out email to gauge interest—world lit major? issues w/ cross-listing, etc.—ongoing issue with travel grants (including faculty grant money)? spreadsheet needs to be updated, something needs to happen, rules aren’t articulated clearly, process needs clarification, Tenney worried about people using travel grant funds for “fun” travel, not presenting/participating in conferences, language should be changed, but might deter CW grad students from attending AWP, also funds should be accessible for people going on job market but there are mixed opinions about this; course proposal form issues? techno glitches, etc.; 109H app is lengthy, rigorous, also glitches, deters people from applying—C & A committee says it’s partly the nonsensical design (didn’t translate in qualtrics, that is)—labor issues w/ form/109, better for grad students, not-so-much for adjuncts/lecturers—proposal vs. form? navigating form is difficult, also repetition—someone who’s trained should design form
DANIEL ON ND: in the future, Lee would like to see ND happen in February or March, too close to AZQ and this year it begins on Passover—also, should be stipend for chair of ND in the future—AZQ hosting dinner for Jack Halberstam & Don Pease w/ 2 grad students, Daniel suggests Chris Sloman & Caitlin Myers
GPSC: technical issues with elections, etc.
SLAT REP? Issue with applications, perhaps not on listserv, big issue because this program needs representation
WRIPACA: 3-week classes are gone for good; approved grade appeals now handled by SBS, but they only handle the paperwork & follow-up? transparency?; revising language for late policy, etc.; class observations might be required in the fall, TCEs don’t quite cut it, observations would help with prof. development, etc.; wripac wants feedback from EGU about policy stuff, potential changes, urgent concerns (in terms of long-term planning)?
CO-CHAIRS: teaching load reduction is top priority; also, what’s the deal with SBS grade appeal? (Antonnet) it would be nice to have some clarification/transparency about the changes that have taken place—but the writing program administrators seem to agree that these changes and the process itself should be entirely transparent—all in all, it seems like it’s more a shift in paperwork-handlers, rather than an entire revamping of the process itself—still, writing program is on our side but what about sbs?—AND does instructor-of-record still have the ultimate authority, or no? (Sonia)
LIT: Faculty meeting, moving evaluations from qualtrics to TCEs; MA exam, not much push back, so changes will be put in motion, fewer texts (42) required for reading list, exam will be taken at some point during the 2nd year, then work on qual in 3rd year, also more diverse texts/options for the list, Dr. LeSeur suggested that the list be less focused on certain more traditional, canonical British/American texts, also having more wild card texts could solve the problem of course work not necessarily corresponding directly to exam texts
GLC: more on MA exam, current 2nd year students, 1st years, and new admits will get to choose between new and old exam, more about revamping list, should be codified more carefully, structure—>content—side note: the list hasn’t been touched since 1987! Contemporary works included? categories? number of readings for each? issue will be revisited at future meetings—also, faculty are concerned about enforcing minority author texts? ethical? how to increase diversity an ongoing discussion; Tenney also really wants to focus on a more meaningful introduction for first-year students, mandatory meeting w/ first-years and social gathering(s) at the beginning of the semester, peer/faculty mentorships should be more meaningful/involved, perhaps we can look at the RCTE model (volunteer mentors & coordinators), also encouraging people to come to first-year colloquium?
RCTE: spiffy hire (Nicole Ashanti McFarlane), now soliciting suggestions for new faculty, 2 positions available
D & I: 2 events coming up, cafe pain & a tumamoc hike on the 17th, more details in an email soon, also pasco on 4/19, 4-6 pm