GENERAL ASSEMBLY MINUTES FOR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 13, 2020 I. Council Roll Call A. 18 Councils in Attendance
II. Special Guests A. President Gregory L. Fenves i. Thank you Elena and thank you Senate for allowing me to be here and speak about the initiatives that are happening at UT. ii. Let me talk about some of the things that we have in place on campus ● For the past three years, we’ve been working very hard on college affordability, as it’s become a topic of discussion more and more recently. ● Starting this fall, for current students and the students that will be here next year either as a freshman or transfer, there’ll be the Texas Advance Commitment. For those students whose families earn less than $65,000, their tuition and fees will be covered with financial aid (no loans). ● For students whose families make $65,000 to $125,000, there’ll be an assured minimum. ● I think that this is an important step for the university to recognize campus affordability. iii. Secondly, I hope all of you have heard about the announcement that we made about two weeks ago with a very generous gift from Michael and Susan Dell with the Dell Foundation. ● We are going to expand the Dell Scholars Program to all incoming freshman students who receive a Pell Grant. ● Advising Counseling, additional staff, personalized programs ● They’ve been covering this for the past 15 years, and it’s been very successful. ● Eventually all Pell Grant students will be Dell Scholars ● Additional $20,000 scholarship for those students who need it the most in the prime of their studies at UT. ● We’ve made a lot of progress for retention and graduation, but there is still a gap, and although we’ve been closing the gap, our goal is to have no difference in graduation. And that’s the 6-year graduation rate, but none of you all are going to take 6 years to graduate. But the important thing is that if you go back and talk to alumni that were here in the 1980s or 1990s, UT was a place that admitted a lot of students and then decided if you could hack it, with a lot of weeder courses, with barely having 70% of their students graduate. ● Today, our 6-year graduation rate is 86%, and we want to get everybody to 90%. No matter what your background is, where you come from, we want everyone to succeed. We need your help to do your part to work hard and study hard, but to also, tell us what you need. iv. Housing ● Housing is expensive as Austin is a expensive place to live in. With a university of over 50,000 students with only 7,500 beds. So this is a very challenging, difficult problem, so we’re working on some housing strategies, and I expect that we’ll make decisions about two projects in the near future. a. New dorm at Creekside and what exactly do you want and where is the affordability level that we need to be at and how do we achieve that goal. But we’ll probably have at least 600 new beds at a new Creekside dorm. b. Hope to finalize this Spring: a new type of housing for graduate students, as there’s no graduate housing at the moment. We need to make sure that it’s a residence that graduate students want and is affordable, and there’ll be at least 500 beds for graduate students. ● This is just scratching the surface, as even if we add 1000 beds, this is just a down payment in terms of new students, as we just don’t have the land ourselves to build new housing. v. Sexual Misconduct Working Group ● This is a serious problem on our campus, and I appreciate the students and advocates for bringing that to us. We’ve been having very productive meetings about how do we change the culture at UT, how do we communicate expectations of conduct, how do we train faculty and staff and how to support students, and especially survivors, what are the policies and procedures, we want you to have trust in those procedures, to be able to truly investigate them. ● Very optimistic that we’ll be able to do this, and we have some of the best outside experts that have worked with many other universities. vi. Q&A ● Q: So on the issue of affordability, I know at a Faculty Council meeting, you mentioned that the Board of Regents changed their process for setting tuition this past year, so could you elaborate on what the process entails now, and how we could potentially incorporate more student input? a. A: The process had been on non-legislative years that the Board had asked the campuses to go through a pretty public, engaged process to recommend to the Board a tuition increase. And then, those would be submitted to the Board around a December timeframe, and the Board would make a decision at their February meeting. We had not heard from the Board through early Fall about that, so we were starting to try to figure out what they wanted to do. And then, they told told us that we’re going to set the tuition at the Board meeting in February. Then came the November Board meeting, and they set the tuition. The Board sets the tuition, that is their decision. This won’t come up for another two years, so we’re going to work with them on what is the process they want and what is the input that they expect from students in terms of tuition. ● Q: So in regards to OIE and Title IX, when LAC met with them in the fall, they mentioned that because the rates of reporting have faced an increase in the levels that they can’t even expect, it’s hard to anticipate how many people they’ll need, so I’m curious how many members we might need to alleviate this issue? So I’m kind of curious how the university’s planning to hire more employees, as the problem is with students, a lot of times when students bring up policy issues, it’s a bit too late How’s the university starting to plan for these kind of things and how are we going to start allocating enough budget? a. A: Let me separate OIE and Title IX, because those are the professionals. Complaints have increased dramatically, because first, it’s in the news a lot, and the other change that’s taken place is a new state law, SB 212, which requires all employees to report. And so, that’s where the big increases are coming from in OIE, so we added staff, and we knew that was going to happen with OIE. We’re monitoring the caseload and the amount of cases coming in so we can assess what’s going on. We don’t know if it’s going to keep increasing at the same rate, but we are committed to making sure that all allegations are dealt with fairly and expeditiously. b. CMHC - I’ve talked with student government and the Senate of College Councils and PSAC many times over this. The number of visits have been increasing quite dramatically, and so, we’ve added quite a few staff, we’ve instituted the care program in a number of colleges/schools, and we are trying to increase the needs as much as possible. I have to say though that there are going to be limits on how many counselors we can have, so we are trying to look at other universities about what are effective ways of dealing with counseling and mental health services. ● Q: As NSC, we are really happy to hear about the financial aid, and so, we are wondering how this will affect current students? a. A: Let me separate out the Dell Scholars Program - will apply for new Pell Grant students only. Advanced Commitment will apply to all students in the fall who qualify. We didn’t want to phase that in because it would take too long and wouldn’t help with affordability. So that will apply to all undergraduate Texas residents, and for the first time, new and current transfer students. ● Q: Every year, students from across Texas receive a UT acceptance, but choose not to enroll due to multiple reasons. What is the university doing to address to enrollment differential for students? a. Q: So you’re asking about students who are admitted who decide not to come here? i. A: Yes. 1. A: I can’t speak for the past too much, but we probably didn’t worry too much as there are so many students here. a. Q: Sorry, I may have communicated that incorrectly, I specifically mean students who want to come to UT but there are barriers that stop them from doing so, to make sure that there’s a diverse student body. i. Fenves Q: So you’re talking about who we admit, not who’s enrolling? ii. A: Students worrying about why they can’t come to UT. iii. Fenves A: When students who have been admitted decide not to come, we try to send out surveys, but the results aren’t that great, so we try to do focus groups, to see what are the factors? You applied, you were admitted, why didn’t you come? We are trying to understand that in a more focus group-sense, because the surveys don’t come back in a focus group-sense. Finances are a part of it, and there are other opportunities that are available maybe where a student lives. Texas is one of the few states that’s growing in population, so universities from other states are looking for talent in Texas, so we do get declines from our admissions office because they’re going out of state, so we want to understand, could we be doing something better? ● Q: I know that the DDCE has rolled out a new Diversity Certificate Program that’s available to staff and faculty at the University, so I was wondering if you had a chance to complete the training, and if not, do you have any intention in doing so? And do you plan on making it required for staff on campus? a. A: I haven’t done it myself, but I’m very familiar with the program. The question about mandatory training and mandatory requirements comes up, and I’m not sure what the right answer is, because we want people to take those courses and get that training. The training is much more effective if someone desires it. When you have to take a required course for your major, it may not be as interesting as a course that you’ve elected to take. Whether it’s diversity or training on our sexual misconduct policy, I’d like much more to make expectations and say here are opportunities to learn, improve your understanding, be a better person, so I think that long-term is much more effective than requiring it and making people do it, because I just get concerned about that, but it’s a really good program. ● Q: I am the President of UASC, a big concern that’s facing our school and a few other smaller schools, is the fact that because we don’t have big donors, our students are faced with a lot more costs than students from other schools. Recurring materials are very costly, so I was wondering if there were anything we could be doing better in terms of hidden costs in smaller schools on campus? a. A: Architecture is the one where it’s probably the most [in terms of cost], because of the tools and supplies that are needed. I’ve talked with Dean Addington about it. I’m aware of the problem, but we don’t have a solution yet, but I will say that we also are going to our donors across the university, for the Texas Challenge to increase our financial aid that is applied to all students, because we recognize that donor interest is not evenly distributed. ● Q: NSC is currently working on adding diversity & inclusion to our core values as a college, and so, we contacted the President’s Office about adding it to the University Core Values, and we were told that there wasn’t any interest. So could you explain a bit the President’s Office stance on that? a. A: I’m very committed to diversity & inclusion, if you go to my website or the University website, and you can see the plans that the University has in place. The core values have been around for quite a long time, there was a long process that went through, they are very fundamental, and I like our core values. They might not cover everything, but they are very fundamental. My focus has been on what are our initiatives, what are our programs, what are we actually doing, because I think that’s where the progress is made. I think at some point, if we have a university-wide conversation about our core values, it would have to be very broad and organized, as opposed to 7 core values we’d have 8 or 9 or 10, and while I think that’s a good conversation to have, I’d rather focus on achieving the goals we’ve set in place. ● Q: Is there any update on the status of that Diversity Action plan, especially with the current ambiguity with that plan? a. A: The plan is an evolving plan and so, we’ve had Leonard talk about it and update us. We wanted it to be a living plan and see what the steps are and what the actions are. ● Q: I just want to talk about D&I. D&I is a strength, and our demographics as a University, especially when it comes to black students whose demographics haven’t changed in the past few years, aren’t living up to standards. You mentioned putting D&I into action rather than making it a core value, so what are you doing right now to reflect more the demographics of Texas? a. A: Well we’ve worked very hard in recruiting, the percentages actually have gone up since 2003. And so that’s one of the goals that I’ve had with Dr. Moore, recruiting at an early stage, so hopefully we’ll get a very good yield for students. I’m pleased with the process, and it’s very positive progress, and while the percentages have gone pretty slowly, not as much as we want, it’s work that we’re undertaking.
III. Special Reports
IV. Organizational Announcements
V. Regular Guests A. The Office of the Dean of Students: Marcus Mayes ([email protected]) B. Student Government: Camron Goodman ([email protected]) i. Three things ● A.B. 8 - An amendment for appropriations ● A.B. 7 - An amendment for an International Students Representative - sent back to committee ● A.R. 6 - In support of a non-traditional students on campus a. Working with the Undergraduate Students on that C. Graduate Student Assembly: Christina Baze ([email protected]) i. Texas Black & White Awards ● Friday, February 28, 6-8 PM in the WCP Ballroom ● RSVP and nominate leaders at utgsa.net/bwawards ● As student leaders, please come by D. Campus E+E: Mario Aparicio ([email protected]) i. Can pick up crushgrams tomorrow! ii. Events: https://universityunions.utexas.edu/events-entertainment iii. Please check us out on Facebook!
VI. Spotlights
VII. Internal Implementation Updates
VIII. Unfinished Business
IX. New Business A. S.B. 1907: Codifying Senate Girl Day Partnership i. Bill speaks for itself, essentially as far as Senate’s involvement in trying to promote a better academic environment and address issues of inequity, we felt that one of the best ways to do that was a hands-on opportunity and commitment that every single year, in partnership with the Senate of College Councils, both Internal and External as well are welcome to be a part of it as well; essentially, Senate is going to be a part of that partnership to address our organizational commitment to address gender inequity in subjects like technology and science, and at the same time, understand the root cause of those issues, and trying to address those in what I think is a much more creative and fun way. ii. This is really exciting. For those who might not know about Girl Day, it’s a program sponsored by Women in Engineering and serves 8,000 middle-school to elementary-school aged girls to come and do fair-like activities that encourage them to pursue different things that they wouldn’t normally be offered the opportunity to do. iii. Q&A ● Q: I just wanted to that as Natural Sciences Council, we obviously love women in STEM in general, and it’s definitely near and dear to my heart, but I’m just kind of confused as to why we need to have a piece of legislation for this? a. A: So, the reason why we’re doing legislation on this to make a commitment to do this annually, and we think that it’s very important that we get our name on something as important as educational equity. b. A: Regardless of the legislation, we have this really cool event planned that’s geared more towards leadership in STEM education, and it’s just like a choose-your-own-adventure station where girls come in and they select a profession from four selections: physician, scientist, professor, or engineer, and we give them props; for example, if they select doctor, we give them a coat and we refer to them as Dr. with their last name, and then a bunch of Senate volunteers act as sort of like employees for them, and take them through scenarios and have them make decisions within that leadership capacity. Part of something that is addressed in the legislation is the thought of gendered role playing for education and the idea that having the capacity to embody the role and what it means to be a part of that science and technology-related environment as somebody who is female-identifying is a part of that, and because Senate is a lot more proactive about doing some of these things on a higher-education level, we also have to recognize that not only is there an issue with gender disparity in STEM education, but that’s there’s an even bigger disparity in leadership within STEM for women. So that was something that we had planned, and as we were talking about it as we were trying to discuss ways to [plan it], we thought that this was a really cool thing, we thought that this was something that really aligned well with Senate and gave everyone an opportunity to have a more tangible manifestation of the work that we do. And so, that conversation led to the conclusion that if we codify this in our Constitution, we can ensure that every year, something like this is done to promote the same goals. Does that address your question? i. Q: I don’t think that there are any questions about the existence of inequity in STEM in terms of gender and other things, so I don’t have any questions about that and it’s really great that you’re doing this event. I guess my main question is still that, normally events are normally legislated, if that makes sense? And so, my question is just, is there a reason to legislate it now or would it be more beneficial to wait and see if the event goes well and legislate it in the future, since you’ll exactly know what to do? Or is it good for funding or is there another reason it needs to be done right now? 1. A: Like we said earlier, it’s mostly just a commitment to make sure that we’re doing this every single year. As far as codifying it later, that’s something that we can definitely do, it’s not something that’s [inaudible], but we’re still going to do the event next week either way, and we’re very very excited. I guess the reason that we’re trying to pass this now is so that in future years, this doesn’t get pushed under the rug, and that this stays a tradition and a commitment for years to come. 2. A: We kind of already have our vision set out right now. The good thing about Senate is that every year, there are new faces, new blood, new ideas to go about doing those things. And there are actually already codified events that Senate is a part of and so, it’s sort of staying with the tradition that this is a sort of thing that has an important focus for Senate to be able to be a part of, especially since we’re supposed to be the Voice in Academics, and over 60 organizations participate in one of the largest events for STEM education, and we’re not a part of that. I definitely understand where you’re coming from and what your ideas about that are, and so, I do understanding what you’re saying, but that’s ultimately the intention, to make sure that it stays in place. ● Q: Sorry if this has already been addressed, but is this the first Sponsored Event in the Constitution? With the way it’s [legislated] on here, I just want to make sure. a. A: Yeah, well the thing is, I would like to address that better if I’m able to take a look over the Constitution, and I would direct that to Adebayo since he’s just a genius with that stuff so he’ll probably be able to better address that, so if there’s an issue regarding how the legislation is written, we can fix that and I’d be happy to review this with you later, I just don’t have it in my memory. b. A: I can speak to that a little bit. Last year, I chaired the Recruitment & Retention Committee, in which we put on a lot of events, as you know, and we actually earlier in the year, when we were reviewing bills to revise some of the language in the Constitution, we revised a couple of the committee descriptions, and we actually took out reference to specific events. [For example,] the R&R description used to mention our sort of capstone events like Ready, Set, Go! or Longhorn School Bus, and we took the mention of them specifically out, and I think our reasoning behind that was that the existence of that committee is not meant to hinge completely upon those two events, and right, like this semester R&R and FA put on a really great event, actually this week, that never happened before, and so we wanted to not, not to say that mentioning specific events boxes anyone in, but it was just my opinion that we didn’t need to reference specific events in describing the goal and the mission of that committee, so earlier this year there is precedent that we’ve removed or kind of moved away from prescribing specific events in the Constitution. c. A: The reason for which it’s under Sponsored Events is because this is kind of unprecedented in terms of a Senate-Wide event, so in my opinion, having been given the legislation to look at, it made sense to make it its own category in case there are any Sponsored Events in the future, but I’m definitely open to hearing suggestions for that. i. Q: I guess the reason why I’m asking is that is because if this is the only Sponsored Event with a whole new article, I guess my question is that, is Senate planning on doing more things like Girl Day? Because then I think retroactively, it’d make sense to include things like Longhorn School Bus where all the Councils participate, and then also, FA does their Women in Academia Panel every year, and they do an Appreciation Luncheon every year, which are two really big events put on by Senate as long as I’ve been here, so I’m just kind of curious, if you’ve created a whole new part of the Constitution, what’s the goal with that? 1. A: The reason I separated them is because Girl Day isn’t an event put on by Senate itself while Longhorn School Bus and the Faculty Panels are put on by Senate itself. Girl Day is put on by a different organization, it already exists, and we’re partnering with them, and so, that’s why I felt that it was different from the other events. 2. A: If I could add just one thing, thank you Bayo by the way, I just want to clarify something that might help better understand the sort of intention behind doing something like that. One part, I think, in sort of understanding that, I’ve been volunteering with Girl Day for the past three years for different organizations, and each year it’s been a blast, and I’m sure some of you have had the chance to walk in and see the thousands and thousands of families and excited students there, participating in a lot of activities, and so, this opens the door for a greater degree of funding if this is something that we continue to do in the future. And I think that this is an opportunity to be had to be a lot more ambitious with this partnership and with this organization, with it being codified in the Constitution, I think it has the opportunity to become traditional in terms of what Senate ends up doing around this month of February, and I think it’s also a great opportunity to start to amend some of the continuous problems that Senate has when it comes to connecting Internal and External events and relationships, by continuing to build on that in the future, and having Senate’s Girl Day partnership be an event that really every Council is a part of alongside Senate, but right now, we’re focused on making sure this event kicks ass, and we’re hoping that through passing this legislation, or in the discussions about how it can become a better piece, we’ll be able continue a tradition like that in the future. iv. Q&A expires v. Sent to Councils B. S.R. 1908: A Resolution in Support of Creating a Student Bereavement Policy for Grieving Students i. We were actually trying to get this tabled for a week prior to tonight, because I received input from multiple Councils as well as Faculty Council, and I have not had time to make those edits, so we would like to have this tabled. ii. Q&A ● Closed without questions iii. FAC and GEC are recognized at this time, and the number of Councils in attendance increases to 20 iv. Motion to Table ● PASSES UNANIMOUSLY C. S.R. 1909: A Resolution in Support of Hiring More Counselors at the Counseling and Mental Health Center to Meet International Association of Counseling Services (IACS) Standards i. We found out that after December, CMHC has chosen to hire 6 more counselors, so with this new information, we’d like to have this tabled indefinitely. ii. Q&A ● Closed without questions iii. Motion to Table Indefinitely ● PASSES UNANIMOUSLY D. S.R. 1910: A Resolution in Support of Enforcing that Professors Disclose Resource Purchases on Course Schedules i. This is in support of enforcing that professors disclose their resource purchases for their classes on the course schedules. This is in line with President Fenves being here and the costs that come up with classes. Currently, professors are supposed to be doing this, but they have not, and so we are trying to reiterate this and [bring it up again]. ii. Some of the grievances, such as the one expressed with Student Architecture Council, are that students are dealing with costs that are in the hundreds of dollars, and it really does harm students that face more hardships, and with prices up to like $400 and students having to work part-time or pay half of their rent for textbooks, so this really does affect all students, and especially those who face more hardships. Again this is seen within the College of Fine Arts, and within Moody we got it from an RTF student who had to pay hundreds of dollars for old film, so this is how it was brought up for us. iii. Q&A ● Q: It’s fitting that I brought this up earlier with President Fenves, and so, I see that in your resolved statement that you have a proposal for professors to supply additional purchases for approval, so who would they be submitting that approval to? a. A: So me and Joe Wallace who co-authored this, we met with Brenda Schumann, the University Registrar, and she said that professors are required to submit with these extra fees. I forgot exactly what she said but students who have scholarships can sometimes use those scholarships to get them waived, but they have to submit a proposal. b. A: So it’s already supposed to be a requirement, but they’re not, but yes they’re already supposed to be doing that, it’s supposed to go through the Registrar, and so it would also be on the course schedule. ● Q: Does this pertain specifically to only mandated supplies or optional ones [as well]? a. Q: Do you mean like optional textbooks? i. A: On some occasions, professors will have in their syllabi that something is “optional,” but functionally it’s sort of necessary to pass the class. 1. A: So when we discussed this, we were first trying to solve things that were in the syllabus, but we actually found that sometimes, professors don’t even put this in the syllabus, but making sure that they are held accountable in doing so, putting it not only in the syllabus but also in the course schedule, when people register, but we do want to look into that as well. 2. A: As far as I know, the Registrar does not require supplies to be pre-approved if they’re optional, and that would be a separate piece of legislation. ● Q: This policy already exists according to the Registrar, so with this piece of legislation, how is this going to make it more enforceable, being that the policy is already here? a. A: Personally, I think it’s important that we remind professors that this is their job. A lot of professors have been here for a really long time, so sometimes they think that they can get away with these things, so making sure that it’s sent out to all of them, reminding them about it, trying to meet with the Deans thereafter to make sure that they’re making sure to enforce this with their professors and checking up on it, but we felt that it was important to pass an official piece of legislation to show that students actively are caring about this. ● Q: So one of the concerns that was brought up during Internal Senate last week, is since this kind of thing is already not in effect, but is already a requirement for professors, would putting it back into effect, or rather making it enforced, encourage professors to list things as required that otherwise may have been listed as optional? Not “optional” things that are needed to pass the course, but optional things are actually optional that they might decide to use or might not, especially new professors that haven’t worked out their curriculum yet may list everything that they might use. a. A: That could definitely happen; however, the purpose of putting it on the course schedule is to let students know ahead of time that these classes they’re registering for will have expected purchases beforehand, and then the first day of class, professors can tell students what’s actually required. The purpose is that we don’t want students to walk into class and be blindsided with a $200 purchase that they weren’t expecting. More than often, professors overestimate, rather than underestimate, and the idea is not to deter students from taking classes that they’re interested in because of financial burdens, but to give them time ahead to plan and expect those costs, rather than using their rent or grocery money on it. So it’s not to deter students from taking classes, just so that they can at least plan ahead whenever they register. ● Q: Looking at this piece of legislation, I know there’s precedent for it, because if you look at course schedules back during 2005 and 2004 for example, you can see that most classes have a fee under them that’s listed, but I feel that they way that they used to do it was on the departmental level, so especially now when you’re registering, there are a lot of courses that don’t have professors listed until very close to when the course starts (ex: the Department of Mathematics) or professors might change last minute, for example, my Spanish professor my first semester here changed a few days before the semester started. And so, would maybe having this be more standardized on the departmental level be better rather than having it based on professors? a. A: That’s a good point to bring up. I guess right now for this legislation, it’s to reiterate the current policy and how we’ve come to follow it, but that’s definitely a good point to bring up, thank you. b. A: Yeah, so when we’re trying to implement it, I think we would benefit from making sure that the department heads are also aware of it. ● Q: In the School of Architecture, we have conversations about this constantly with our Dean, and personally, I’ve never ever seen a course schedule or syllabus in any of my Architecture classes that have cost included, so it seems that effectively, this practice is not in place whatsoever. We’ve had discussions with our Dean about how to handle expected course costs, and she’s said things like, “Maybe I’ll propose a cost limit and make sure that professors don’t go over them, but how do we make them estimate it?”, so this is stuff that we’re constantly thinking about, and it’s to the point where even our Dean does not know that this policy even exists, so I’m wondering right now, effectively, what is the enforcement of this? Is the Registrar even at all trying enforce this? a. A: I do know that issue actually, we’ve talked about this with our Dean, , in terms of estimating costs, I know one of their professors is surveying the students at the end of the students to see how much students spent on average, so they can make assessments going forward. Also, with the other part of that, I’m pretty sure there’s a new Registrar that’s been hired, so I don’t know how they’re planning on enforcing it; in the past, it was not enforced at all, and the current Registrar seems much more willing to work with us, so hopefully they’ll hopefully take more action with that, but we don’t know the disciplinary measures that will be in place. b. A: The Faculty Innovation Center sends out an email to Faculty members, and they have a set messaging campaign, but a lot of Faculty just delete those emails. ● Q: Just on the note of departmental notices, I’m not sure if this is common practice, but in a lot of my engineering classes, there’s not a lot of uniformity in classes, so in the same department, there may be different professors who use different textbooks, so that is something that you may want to factor in. a. A: We can look into that. I’m not sure if the way the course schedule is set up if it’s by that specific class or the professor, but we can talk to the Registrar for more information. iv. Q&A expires v. Motion to extend Q&A by One Question, passed. ● Q: Did Brenda say anything about the enforcement of this policy? a. A: She didn’t specify much, she pretty much said that the policy exists and that professors pretty much have to follow this. So in terms of making sure that they’re held accountable, we didn’t really get into much of that b. A: I will say that we were having these meetings in the Fall as well with the Registrar, but I do think we could discuss that, but I also think that with Dean and department head pressure, professors will be more inclined to follow the policy, and with Bayo bring that up, we should probably write that in, but making sure that that level of leadership is somewhere, to make sure that the Deans are the ones enforcing this. vi. Sent to Councils E. S.R. 1911: A Resolution in Support of the Creation of a University-Wide OER Faculty Award Program i. I just wanted to start with a brief background about this legislation, so OERs[Open Educational Resources] are learning materials that are on any form of media that are public domain and available to students for free. And with the cost of textbooks, they inflated 1041% in the last 42 years and is only getting worse; the average student will pay $1200 a year just for textbooks. And so, we saw this problem with affordability, and we wanted to create a legal way to circumvent textbooks in the classroom that also provides students with this opportunity to learn because it’s important to emphasize affordability. So we chose to do this on OERs mainly because we saw a lot of research that showed that OERs improve classroom capabilities for lower-income students and minority students as well. And so with that, we started working on this legislation, and so now, we’ll mention some of the infrastructure. ii. First of all, in terms of what we believe that this could do for OERs, we hope that the publication of the winners, whether it be departmental or university-wide, will help to increase the visibility and the awareness of OERs, as half of the issue is that people don’t know what they are or that they exist at all. In addition, we are show faculty that this movement towards OERs that’s been occurring over the past few years isn’t a passive encouragement and rather a very very active push that we are putting our money behind essentially, that we fully support, and that we actually really we need. So in terms of the administrative process behind it, nominations will occur through an online form, and in terms of getting it to everyone, we’ll go through mostly departmental heads. I think that they would start to nominate people. We will also advertise in newsletters so that students could nominate, and also self-nomination will be a possibility. Judging will occur by a committee put together by the sponsors of the award, comprised of students and faculty from a wide range of disciplines. They’ll be judged on 4 major types of categories: economic impact, initiative of the professor (whether or not they made it by themselves), the quality of the OER, and is their class based entirely on the OER, or is there an additional component that students would have to pay for. iii. We had a meeting with Dr. Haricombe (Vice Provost and Director of UT Libraries), and there’s currently a conversation about OERs happening, and she said that passing a piece of legislation showing student support for OERs is going to very helpful when they’re having those discussions at Faculty Council. Also, just for the sake of transparency, we wrote into the piece of legislation a resolution that was introduced in Faculty Council, and we had written that it was passed, but that’s actually not the case, it was tabled, so the next Faculty Council Meeting is Feb 17, so they should hear that again. iv. Q&A ● Q: So we had a couple of questions from our Council just about the awarding process. Our first concern was that, because there’s prize money, we were afraid that some professors might try to manipulate the impact of OER system, so we were wondering if there were anything in place to prevent that? We also had a concern about alternative supplies/textbooks that professors might incorporate just to count for the award. a. A: In terms of alternative textbooks, we’re hoping that we can go through their past syllabi, and if they required it in the past, and also, there’ll be faculty on the award committee, which will help keep a balance, and make sure that professors aren’t abusing it. ● Q: Can we get a little more of a clarification of what the prize would be? Would it go to professors’ pockets or more to their department? a. A: The reason why we chose to do a monetary award, is because the reason why professors shy away from OERs is that they want to tailor it to their classroom, without having to go through a bunch. So that’s why we chose to do a monetary award, similar to how the University of Houston and Texas A&M do it, but that’s a good idea to give the money to the departments. We could see if that’s a possibility, but the reason why we wanted it to go to professors is to compensate their time. ● Q: Have you talked to any faculty members about how much money would be necessary to incentivize this idea? a. A: In the last meeting that we had with Dr. Haricombe, the Uni Libraries system is expected to take out grants in the near future, so depending on where those grants are spread out, that leftover money will be hopefully put into this award system, so we don’t have an exact dollar amount yet, and since it’s a new award, it’d be better to start small and then build up. ● Q: If you have faculty in mind that have already expressed interest in this, there’s a little bit of concern that this might seem like an extra responsibility to those professors, so are there people in mind or are there people who seem like they’d want to do it? a. A: So in our conversation with our Dean, they are very supportive of advancing OERs at least in CNS, and I think that’s a shared concern across the University, so I think in terms of people in administrative roles in the University Libraries System and also Deans of other Colleges/Schools, I think they’d be in support of this as well. b. A: I also do know of a couple of professors who’ve had expressed an interest in OERs, so they’d definitely be willing to spend a couple extra hours a month to work on it. c. A: There’s already a precedent of professors that use OERs in the classroom, for example, in the Czech [language program], there’s a professor who uses OERs for First and Second-Year Czech, and there’s also a Calculus professor that uses OERs, so compensation for their time and strives towards affordability is important. It’s not just expanding interest with professors that currently use them but also professors that I believe we should award for their extra efforts in their classrooms. v. Sent to Councils
X. Intermission
XI. Council Legislation Update
XII. Agency Reports
XIII. Council Announcements A. Association for Nurses in Graduate School: Madhuri Reddy ([email protected]) B. Communication Council: Catherine Mouer ([email protected]) C. Dell Medical School Student Senate: Sam Baldazo ([email protected]), Oliver Ha ([email protected]), Lana Schommer ([email protected]), Ariane Taylor ([email protected]) D. Education Council: Brianna Villarreal ([email protected]) E. Fine Arts Council: Austin Townsend ([email protected]) F. Graduate Business Council: Chelsea Evans ([email protected]) G. Graduate Communication Council: Nathan Rossi ([email protected]) H. Graduate Engineering Council: Manojkumar Lokanathan ([email protected]) I. Graduate Public Affairs Council: Juany Torres ([email protected]) J. Liberal Arts Council: Praveena Javvadi ([email protected]) i. Spring 2020 Career Forum ● Wednesday, February 19, 2020 from 4:30 to 7:00 PM ● RLP 1.302B (Glickman Center) ● Employers including: a. Google b. Accenture c. Texas Appleseed d. Center for Public Policy Priorities ...and more! K. Master in Professional Accounting Council: Richard Liu ([email protected]) L. Natural Sciences Council: Alcess Nonot ([email protected]) i. CNS Got Talent ● Sign up to audition! a. tiny.cc/CNS_talent ● Date: March 3, 2020 ● Location: WCP Auditorium ● Time: 6:00 - 8:00 PM ● Free Cookies & Popcorn ● Talented Acts and Popular CNS Professors as Judges M. Pharmacy Council: Isha Deshpande ([email protected]) N. Social Work Council: Kay Edwards ([email protected]) O. Student Association for the School of Information: Beth Pattie ([email protected]) P. Student Bar Association: John Zappia ([email protected]) Q. Student Engineering Council: Samraz Badruddin ([email protected]) R. Undergraduate Architecture Student Council: Nick Dalquest ([email protected]) S. Undergraduate Business Council: Mishan Kara ([email protected]) T. Undergraduate Geological Society: Christian Roumelis ([email protected]) U. Undergraduate Studies Council: Wesley Brewer ([email protected]) V. University of Texas Nursing Students’ Association: LaRae Lundberg ([email protected])
XIV. Executive Board Reports A. President: Elena Ivanova ([email protected]) i. CTBAC Due Tomorrow (2/14) ● McCombs in the lead with 800 responses, Engineering lacking with 100, and also missing a lot of responses from Moody. ii. UTSSAC [UT Systems Student Advisory Council] Recommendations ● Academic Success a. A task force that focuses on the issues that affect special population students and come up with best practices that can be implemented on a system level ● Career Success a. Letter of support for ongoing initiatives for faculty mentoring at graduate and professional schools b. Recommendation for the Improvement of Institutional Career Services for Standard Resources, Staff to Student Ratio, and Reports c. Recommendation for the Improvement of Institutional Career Services and Resources ● Campus Wellness a. Civil Engagement, Sexual Misconduct, Smoking & Tobacco Cessation, Sustainability, and Mental Health, as well as a statement on the support of diversity and condemnation of white supremacy, because that was something that they were looking at in the past, when the new Senate bill was passed to make UT a free public space. i. Civic Engagement - partnership with Campus Vote Project to reduce barriers to voting ii. Sexual Misconduct & Interpersonal Violence Prevention Work - looking for an adequate ratio for case investigators to students, depending on the number of cases, an adequate ratio for confidential advocates to the student population, and an advisor note from institutions to students at the beginning of the semester about SB 212, and then we’re also looking a flowchart with reporting procedures, and also resources available for survivors and students who want to learn more about what resources exist on campus. iii. Smoking & Tobacco Cessation - Looking at the support of the initiatives that the UT system has right now, while also looking at increasing action when it comes to vaping iv. Sustainability - UTS 169 is a Sustainability Practices Policy at the system level, but apparently none of the UT institutions are being held accountable for adhering to those policies. UT Austin is fairly in compliance and so is UT Dallas, but all the other institutions really aren’t, especially UT Permian Basin, UT El Paso, and UT Tyler, so we are trying to ask for greater accountability v. Mental Health - specific recommendations for hiring more counselors and asking for more support from the overall UT System. ● Affordability a. The Board of Regents requires institutions to publish the Tuition and Fee Workbook that is submitted to the Board of Regents, and also asking for more student representation. ● Q: Do you see SHIFT being mentioned at all when it comes to Smoking & Tobacco? a. A: SHIFT is a UT Austin-only initiative, and because it’s donor-funded and not department-funded, I don’t think it would be mentioned at a system level, unless the system would want to fund it at all of the schools, but we could ask the System to look into the success of SHIFT. iii. Elections Committee ● Councils Responsible: a. 19 - Undergraduate Studies Council b. 17 - Undergraduate Business Council c. 7 - Graduate Engineering Council d. 3 - Dell Medical School Student Senate e. 2 - Communication Council B. Vice President: Katie Lee ([email protected]) i. Job Descriptions for President and Vice President ● Please talk to us about the positions if you have any questions ● See attached slides for more detailed descriptions ii. Valentine’s Day Social for External & Internal (CANCELLED) ● Tomorrow 2-4 PM in the Senate office ● Valentine’s Tiff’s Treats iii. Expect an email with the names of the people serving on the Elections Committee & a list of improvements being made to elections this year ● I just want to thank everyone who’s participated in the conversations, especially At-Larges. iv. External Policy Challenge ● Congratulations to Natural Sciences Council and Communication Council! C. Financial Director: Maxson Chu ([email protected]) D. Internal Director: Sarah Hyden ([email protected]) i. University-Wide Appointments Information Form ● Fill out this form by Monday! ● I’m trying to collect some data on how those appointments are going E. Policy Director: Hussain Alkhafaji ([email protected]) i. I’d like to apologize for my late responses and my inaccessibility for the past couple weeks and preceding months due to a personal issue, so in terms of Policy Director office hours or such, they’re on hold for the time being. So I just wanted to make sure that nothing looks like it’s come out as malicious or negligence. I do care about all of the projects that you all At-Larges are doing, and I just wanted to communicate that correctly, and to the College Reps and Leadership Team as well. ii. Anyone that’s interested in volunteering for Girl Day and helping Kayla, Isaac, and me, please let me know. F. Communications Director: Ryan Chandler ([email protected]) i. Thank you to everyone who tabled last week, it was a great help with increasing our responses. ii. If you’re wearing Valentine’s day-ish attire, stick around afterwards, so that we can take pictures. G. Administrative Director: Adebayo Gbakinro ([email protected]) i. We hit TWENTY Councils today!!!! That’s the highest number of Councils that I’ve ever seen since I’ve been in Senate, so it’s really cool to see. H. Membership Director: Vinit Shah ([email protected])
XV. Coordinator Reports A. Diversity Coordinator: Veda Yagnik ([email protected]) i. Isaac and I writing the first draft of the Diversity Executive Board Position, if anyone’s interested in seeing that, we really would appreciate any feedback as I really want to be open about this process ii. I’m scheduling a racial geography tour for Senate, so if any of you all want to come to it, please let me know (there are only 15 spots available) iii. Allyship training at Diversity Subcommittee one week iv. EIC and myself are hosting a Town Hall next week about OIE and inequity across the University B. Outreach Coordinator: Colby Holloman ([email protected]) C. Policy Drafting Coordinator: Camilla Arguedas ([email protected])
XVI. Internal Committee Reports A. Academic Enrichment: Austin Montgomery & Katherine Birch ([email protected]), ([email protected]) B. Academic Policy: Isaac James & Steven Ding ([email protected]), ([email protected]) C. Communications: Deepanshi Sharma & Soren Ettinger DeCou ([email protected]), ([email protected]) D. Equity & Inclusion: Kaimen Goudy & Yash Purohit ([email protected]), ([email protected]) E. Faculty Affairs: Kevin Kim & Vivek Pokkula ([email protected]), ([email protected]) F. Fundraising: Nathan Huang & Kershin Zhuang ([email protected]), ([email protected]) i. Please contribute to our Hornraiser ● hornraiser.utexas.edu/utsenate ● Money goes towards scholarships, allowing more flexibility within Internal and External Budgets! ● (or venmo @utsenate) G. Recruitment & Retention: Grace Farley & Apoorva Kakkilaya ([email protected]), ([email protected]) i. Longhorn School Bus ● When? Friday, April 17, 10 AM - 2 PM ● What? Annual event for local 4th and 5th grade students to come to campus and experience the excitement of UT! ● Councils sign up: https://tinyurl.com/LSB20councils H. Undergraduate Research: Apoorva Chintala & Yukta Sunkara ([email protected]), ([email protected]) i. OUR Texas Student Research Showdown ● Submit a 2-minute video describing your research and win cash prizes! ● https://ugs.utexas.edu/our/showdown ii. Let’s hear from the Professors! ● We want to gather testimonials about their experience with student researchers and publish them on the OUR website! ● We are looking for PIs that you (or someone you know) enjoy working with across various disciplines!
XVII. Ad Hoc Committee Reports A. Campus Wage Reform Ad Hoc Committee: Griffen Goss ([email protected]) B. Financial Aid Policy and Procedures Ad Hoc Committee: Andrew Dareing ([email protected]) i. End-of-Year Report ii. 2 Major Pieces of Legislation ● A Resolution in Support of a New UT Net Price Calculator a. Administrators are in support, it’s just a matter of prioritization and resources ● A Resolution in Support of Moving the Tuition Reimbursement Date a. Going to move the tuition payment later, please let us know if you have any questions C. Multi-Degree/Major Advising Ad Hoc Committee: Adebayo Gbakinro ([email protected]) D. Policy Ad Hoc Committee: Katie Lee ([email protected]) E. UT Senate Archive Ad Hoc Committee: Soren Ettinger DeCou ([email protected])
XVIII. General Member Reports
XIX. At-Large Representative Reports
XX. University-Wide Appointments
XXI. Open Mic A. Academic Policy Committee - Advance Academics i. Deadline is February 20 B. LAC - If you want me to hand-deliver Monster cans to you for an event (I have a lot of them as I’m a representative), please let me know!!! C. R&R - Academic Improvement Scholarship - Deadline tomorrow (2/14) at midnight
XXII. Adjourn