• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Office Bearer Annual Reports – Students’ Council, Meeting 19(18) University of Melbourne Student Union Meeting of the Students’ Council Student Office Bearer Annual Reports 10:00am, Wednesday, the 21st of November, 2018 Meeting 19(18) Location: Training Room 2, Third Floor, Union House Student Office Bearer Annual Reports President Submitted General Secretary Submitted Activities Submitted Clubs & Societies Submitted Creative Arts Submitted Disabilities Submitted Education (Academic Affairs) Submitted Education (Public Affairs) Submitted Environment Submitted Indigenous Not submitted Media Submitted People of Colour Submitted Queer Submitted Welfare Submitted Women’s Submitted Burnley Submitted Victorian College of the Arts Not submitted All Office Bearer Reports are presented as they were received, with only formatting changes. Late reports are not considered valid. 1 Office Bearer Annual Reports – Students’ Council, Meeting 19(18) President Desiree Cai Key activities/Evaluation of activities throughout the year Student Precinct Boy it really has been a year of the student precinct! My work regarding the student precinct has involved a number of different types of meetings- Student Precinct Steering Committee, regular Student Leaders meetings, and a number of regular and ad-hoc user group meetings. All in all this year the project has gone through concept design, schematic design, and pending some financial decisions, the next stage will be detailed design. As of the writing of this report, the projected completion date of the Precinct is somewhere around 2022. There were a number of highlights and key issues that emerged throughout my involvement in the Student Precinct Project. • The business case for the project was finalised near the beginning of my term. This signalled the approval of the student precinct to go forward as a university project with funding • Early Enabling works commenced at the end of 2018 • The Architect, Project Managers, Quantity Surveyors and Builders for the Early Enabling works (knocking buildings down) were tendered and hired at the beginning of the year. • Concept design, the initial design phase with architects after the business case started in May. Before the design stage had commenced, some outlying issues for UMSU had emerged from the business case, bus as the design started many of these issues were able to be solved (or partially solved) to fit the uses of UMSU and other users of the precinct. • After concept design was finalised and approved by the Steering Committee in May, the project moved into the Schematic Design phase. Which increased the detail of the design. During this phase, many many user group meetings were held to determine UMSU’s needs in the precinct. • All of UMSU presentations about the progress in the design of the Precinct were made both in the Concept design and Schematic design phase. These seemed to be very useful for UMSU staff and students to get a snapshot of how the project was progressing, and to ask questions of the project team. • A lot of people- both staff and student reps have been involved in various points in consultation for the project. I facilitated some meetings of the precinct with these people within UMSU, including things like a group for autonomous spaces, and for the requirements of the media department. Many aspects of the precinct and assumptions about the operational governance of the precinct have also tied into some of the work around SSAF and SSAF negotiations that kicked off in the second half of the year. 2 Office Bearer Annual Reports – Students’ Council, Meeting 19(18) The most recent update to the project (as of November 19) is that the Project team has considered a number of value management proposals (proposals to lower the cost of the project) due to quite a large cost overrun at the end of schematic design. The Steering Committee approved the removal of Union Hall as the measure to reduce costs for the project, which is the removal of an important indoor flat-floor event space. However, the project has committed to work closely with UMSU on a model of governance for the precinct which prioritises UMSU’s functioning needs so other spaces that can serve the same function, such as Frank Tate and the Guild Theatre may be utilised effectively as a replacement for Union Hall. All in all, my interaction with the precinct team has been quite successful. UMSU’s voice and the voices of students have been elevated, and we are now considered one of the first points of necessary consultation with the project. I’ve also learned a lot of building project jargon which is fun. UMSU’s relationship and level of interaction with the project has increased massively, especially as the design stage has progressed, which will be good for seeing positive outcomes when we eventually move to the precinct (whenever that may be). Me and the Student Precinct Steering Committee at the November meeting Supporting the Cadmus campaign Academic Integrity Working Group (AIWG) was set up in direct response to issues we raised in relation to CADMUS in other forums including Academic Board. We’ve had a few meetings of the AIWG, but its something that has fallen off the radar a bit as the year progressed. Part of the reason for this is that the trials of CADMUS stopped in Semester 1, and ongoing trials have been relatively slow. Other things discussed in the AIWG included stuff about fraudulent medical certificates, and a general discussion on academic integrity issues. Overall, the approach at the beginning of the year, leveraging the student feedback we had from the CADMUS campaign survey, and pushing the issue to Academic Board was quite successful. 3 Office Bearer Annual Reports – Students’ Council, Meeting 19(18) At this point it seems the university has stalled on CADMUS discussion and slowed trialling a bit, but it’s still an important issue to look out for next year. Supporting the campaign against sexual violence on campus The landscape of the issue of sexual violence on campus has changed a fair bit since the beginning of our terms. We started the year on very unstable footing, with a pretty bad relationship with the university, particularly in regards to this specific issue. Since we’ve talked to the university, and especially through the work of the massive campaign against sexual violence on campus, there has been significant progress on the issue of sexual assault on campus, and the way the university and UMSU work together on it. There have been many key moments within the campaign this year, most notably points including the release of the red zone report into college hazing and the massive rally against sexual violence on August 1st. Generally some of these moments have seen success for the campaign and UMSU, however there could have been more work done in getting more media attention and increased student awareness and support in the lead up to and aftermath of these moments. University Meetings- Respect Student Advisory Group (RSAG) The respect student advisory group was a regular monthly meeting set up as a student consultative group that would help inform the respect taskforce. While UMSU only has one representative (Molly as one of the Women’s Officers) on the Respect Taskforce where decisions are made, the student Advisory Group was intended to be a way to elevate student voices on the issue. In reality, this group has not been very effective at providing student input into the respect taskforce, and has been used more like a focus group about various university measures, or a place to bring items that the university would like to avoid bringing to taskforce. From my understanding, the regular meetings of the RSAG will not continue next year, however, the group may be convened as an ad hoc student input/focus group in the future. The big rally! I have to commend the work of the Women’s officers this year in running the key event that was the big rally against sexual violence on campus on the 1st of August. It was a successful event, with 300-400 students in attendance, and coordinated with similar actions across the country, thanks to the NUS Women’s Department. Aside from the students in attendance, communications for the rally was widespread, and there was visibility and support for the campaign from a large portion of the student body. All in all, the event was a success, and in future campaigns more forward planning with speakers and logistics would have been good. In the aftermath of the rally, the university has taken the voice of UMSU student representatives in the space of responding to sexual assault on campus more seriously. We started to have regular fortnightly meetings with Celia Scott, who is the leading advisor on respect work in Chancellery. Advisor- responding to sexual assault position in Advocacy & Legal 4 Office Bearer Annual Reports – Students’ Council, Meeting 19(18) Near the end of the year, I’ve worked with UMSU management, and have been in discussions with the university with the Women’s officers to get a proposal for a new advisor position within UMSU Advocacy and Legal approved and funded through the university. The position proposed would help guide students through the reporting process at the university, and would be a great initiative to collaborate with the university on- in order to improve the student experience of the reporting process. The SSAF grant put in by UMSU Advocacy and Legal was initially rejected, but on subsequent follow-up, the university is happy to support the initiative, pending agreement with the university on a protocol agreement and shared understanding of how the role would operate. This is a work in progress, progressing very slowly, but hopefully there will be a positive outcome before the start of next semester.

Load more

  139

Copy Link