Herein I share some of Divya's culture. As far as cultures go, its hard to top.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
The Freedom of (Hu)man vs. At Least Europe is Safe
Please use this space to engage in the Great Debate.
So far it has been pointed out that the US has not lived up to its promise to defend human rights. The counter was something along the lines of Russia does not anymore have one party rule.
As mentioned...debatable.
So far it has been pointed out that the US has not lived up to its promise to defend human rights. The counter was something along the lines of Russia does not anymore have one party rule.
As mentioned...debatable.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
El campesinato graduado
Decoding University rhetoric
By: Richard M. Berthold
12/6/07
There are a number of institutions and organizations at UNM, the nature of which you might think you understand. But after 31 years on the faculty, I can assure you that in the Alice in Wonderland world of the American university, not all is what it seems. Let's take a look at some of these building blocks of UNM.
Board of Regents: These are the rarely seen absolute rulers of the University, to whom even the most highly paid president is subservient. They are a collection of attorneys and businessmen who typically have no idea what a real university is like. They serve a function similar to that of the supreme religious council that rules Iran and controls their president.
Scholes Hall: This is the administrative green zone where the regents hold their show meetings after the secret personnel sessions and where each year, they introduce the new president of the University. Unlike the other office buildings on campus, it is regularly redecorated and has clean bathrooms.
Faculty Senate: This is the faculty governance organization created some 30 years ago because full faculty meetings could never get a quorum. It has many of the characteristics of the Weimar Parliament in pre-Nazi Germany and spends most of its time changing the names of departments in the College of Education and sending polite memos to the administration.
Associated Students of UNM: This is the student version of the Faculty Senate, with the difference being that ASUNM actually has real power in that it distributes monies. The ASUNM government, especially during periods of scandal, also serves as a training ground for future professional politicians.
Graduate and Professional Student Association: This organization is much like the social clubs of classical antiquity, through which slaves and the poor found companionship and mutual support. Such is extremely important for graduate students, most of whom are shocked to discover that they actually rank below undergraduates and staff in the University hierarchy and are, in fact, the academic version of campesinos.
University House: This is where the University President used to live before it was too dangerous for him to be on campus after dark. It is now used for meetings, retreats, faculty parties and anything else that does not involve drinking. A campus legend has it that a meth lab was housed in the basement.
Zimmerman Library: This, of course, is the place where the University tests its fire-suppression equipment and water clean-up techniques. It is also a convenient place for the University to store faculty with degrees in library science.
College of Education: This is not actually an academic component of the University, but rather an extrusion of the state and federal bureaucracy on to the campus. The college ensures UNM produces enough educators to fill the administrative needs of Albuquerque Public Schools and to restock its own ranks.
Anderson Schools of Management: This is another strange part of the University, since business has not traditionally been a facet of higher learning. Evidence of this is how little teaching the business faculty actually does because they are constantly engaged in business.
Student Services: Never having been a student at UNM, I am not sure exactly what this organization does, besides ensuring graduate stipend checks are always late.
El Centro de la Raza: This used to be simply Student Services in Spanish but has evolved into a fairly influential racist organization, reasoning that if Hispanics constitute only about 35 to 40 percent of the student population, they clearly need special protection from predatory whites and American Indians.
Office of Equal Opportunity: This is a shadowy federal organization that the University allows on campus only because UNM loses federal monies if it does not. It is a sort of gestapo of academic correctness, ensuring that no one at the University, other than white males, is ever offended. Faculty, especially, are terrified of the office, which, as an inquisition panel, naturally assumes the accused is guilty until proven innocent. If you want to hassle your professor, denounce him to the office. Seriously.
Richard M. Berthold is a retired professor of classical history at UNM. He is the author of Rhodes in the Hellenistic Age.
By: Richard M. Berthold
12/6/07
There are a number of institutions and organizations at UNM, the nature of which you might think you understand. But after 31 years on the faculty, I can assure you that in the Alice in Wonderland world of the American university, not all is what it seems. Let's take a look at some of these building blocks of UNM.
Board of Regents: These are the rarely seen absolute rulers of the University, to whom even the most highly paid president is subservient. They are a collection of attorneys and businessmen who typically have no idea what a real university is like. They serve a function similar to that of the supreme religious council that rules Iran and controls their president.
Scholes Hall: This is the administrative green zone where the regents hold their show meetings after the secret personnel sessions and where each year, they introduce the new president of the University. Unlike the other office buildings on campus, it is regularly redecorated and has clean bathrooms.
Faculty Senate: This is the faculty governance organization created some 30 years ago because full faculty meetings could never get a quorum. It has many of the characteristics of the Weimar Parliament in pre-Nazi Germany and spends most of its time changing the names of departments in the College of Education and sending polite memos to the administration.
Associated Students of UNM: This is the student version of the Faculty Senate, with the difference being that ASUNM actually has real power in that it distributes monies. The ASUNM government, especially during periods of scandal, also serves as a training ground for future professional politicians.
Graduate and Professional Student Association: This organization is much like the social clubs of classical antiquity, through which slaves and the poor found companionship and mutual support. Such is extremely important for graduate students, most of whom are shocked to discover that they actually rank below undergraduates and staff in the University hierarchy and are, in fact, the academic version of campesinos.
University House: This is where the University President used to live before it was too dangerous for him to be on campus after dark. It is now used for meetings, retreats, faculty parties and anything else that does not involve drinking. A campus legend has it that a meth lab was housed in the basement.
Zimmerman Library: This, of course, is the place where the University tests its fire-suppression equipment and water clean-up techniques. It is also a convenient place for the University to store faculty with degrees in library science.
College of Education: This is not actually an academic component of the University, but rather an extrusion of the state and federal bureaucracy on to the campus. The college ensures UNM produces enough educators to fill the administrative needs of Albuquerque Public Schools and to restock its own ranks.
Anderson Schools of Management: This is another strange part of the University, since business has not traditionally been a facet of higher learning. Evidence of this is how little teaching the business faculty actually does because they are constantly engaged in business.
Student Services: Never having been a student at UNM, I am not sure exactly what this organization does, besides ensuring graduate stipend checks are always late.
El Centro de la Raza: This used to be simply Student Services in Spanish but has evolved into a fairly influential racist organization, reasoning that if Hispanics constitute only about 35 to 40 percent of the student population, they clearly need special protection from predatory whites and American Indians.
Office of Equal Opportunity: This is a shadowy federal organization that the University allows on campus only because UNM loses federal monies if it does not. It is a sort of gestapo of academic correctness, ensuring that no one at the University, other than white males, is ever offended. Faculty, especially, are terrified of the office, which, as an inquisition panel, naturally assumes the accused is guilty until proven innocent. If you want to hassle your professor, denounce him to the office. Seriously.
Richard M. Berthold is a retired professor of classical history at UNM. He is the author of Rhodes in the Hellenistic Age.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Varda for Council Chair 2008-2009
W meet V
> Hello - My voice is equally the 'voice of the people'. Presumably, if you
> have a commitment to a democratic process, then there is no reason to be
> 'personally offended' by the right I exercise in speaking a point of view,
> whether you agree with me or not; similarly I must be able and willing to
> hear
> your point of view, whether I like it or not.
> Mediation is not an abridgment of the people's rights - it is intended
> as
> an intermediary process to allow discussion and negotiation to take place
> in a
> supportive atmosphere that prevents excessive emotional violence, which
> people
> can and do get into when they have no recourse to being supported in being
> able to discuss things in a balanced manner, with an experienced
> facilitator.
> I see excessive violence happening in this dispute right now, in ways
> that
> are harmful to many people, including the overall graduate community.
> If mediation doesn't resolve the situation - which it often Does - then
> the
> next step of confrontational legal showdown politics is always still
> available. But the 'will of the people' is not meant to be a hateful
> rampaging tyranny either- whether 'right' or 'wrong' - and your commitment
> to
> 'the will of the people' sounds rather aggressively one-sided, when
> instead,
> it is possible to have both empathy and understanding that there are many
> perspectives on every situation.
> Thus, the point of view that Joseph's leadership 'has landed the
> organization in this situation' is one perspective of many -- it is not
> the
> absolute truth, and I doubt that any of us know the absolute truth. The
> point
> of a democracy is again, to allow for the even-minded exchange of
> different
> understandings in order to approach a working unity. Anger does not help
> to
> create a working harmony and unity among people who inevitably differ in
> their
> understandings of various events, issues and policies. And, you seem
> quite
> willing to address me with what seems like a very angry tone in your note.
> Although we have not met, I see from your tagline that you are in the
> school
> of Law. I would suggest that you consider looking into the mediation
> courses
> offered through the Law School, as I have heard they are excellent.
> Perhaps
> they will be helpful to you in getting a better understanding of the uses
> of
> mediation, and its appropriateness in a wide variety of legal situations.
> Many lawyers have learned to change their tactics from aggressive
> confrontation to mutual satisfaction, and have found that it serves their
> practice far more humanely than they would have expected.
> At this point, although I certainly have a point of view, my commitment
> is
> not to get dragged into the 'tit for tat' level of argument as to who is
> right
> or wrong, and whether what was done was right or wrong.. My intention is
> to
> protect the GPS-DRO, which should remain a neutral organization, from
> being
> improperly led by those who are acting with a conflict of interest when
> they
> speak out adamantly. I will not yet speak out directly on my point of
> view,
> whether it appears to others to be obvious or not, as I do not wish to
> enter
> into the same errors that I feel they have made. I am simply attempting
> to
> stand in the middle and create a more positive and harmonious way of
> dealing
> with all of this. I hope that I can be effective in doing so.
> Perhaps we will meet tomorrow. May we all grow in understanding each
> other,
> and practicing kindness as we walk and work together. Varda.
> Hello - My voice is equally the 'voice of the people'. Presumably, if you
> have a commitment to a democratic process, then there is no reason to be
> 'personally offended' by the right I exercise in speaking a point of view,
> whether you agree with me or not; similarly I must be able and willing to
> hear
> your point of view, whether I like it or not.
> Mediation is not an abridgment of the people's rights - it is intended
> as
> an intermediary process to allow discussion and negotiation to take place
> in a
> supportive atmosphere that prevents excessive emotional violence, which
> people
> can and do get into when they have no recourse to being supported in being
> able to discuss things in a balanced manner, with an experienced
> facilitator.
> I see excessive violence happening in this dispute right now, in ways
> that
> are harmful to many people, including the overall graduate community.
> If mediation doesn't resolve the situation - which it often Does - then
> the
> next step of confrontational legal showdown politics is always still
> available. But the 'will of the people' is not meant to be a hateful
> rampaging tyranny either- whether 'right' or 'wrong' - and your commitment
> to
> 'the will of the people' sounds rather aggressively one-sided, when
> instead,
> it is possible to have both empathy and understanding that there are many
> perspectives on every situation.
> Thus, the point of view that Joseph's leadership 'has landed the
> organization in this situation' is one perspective of many -- it is not
> the
> absolute truth, and I doubt that any of us know the absolute truth. The
> point
> of a democracy is again, to allow for the even-minded exchange of
> different
> understandings in order to approach a working unity. Anger does not help
> to
> create a working harmony and unity among people who inevitably differ in
> their
> understandings of various events, issues and policies. And, you seem
> quite
> willing to address me with what seems like a very angry tone in your note.
> Although we have not met, I see from your tagline that you are in the
> school
> of Law. I would suggest that you consider looking into the mediation
> courses
> offered through the Law School, as I have heard they are excellent.
> Perhaps
> they will be helpful to you in getting a better understanding of the uses
> of
> mediation, and its appropriateness in a wide variety of legal situations.
> Many lawyers have learned to change their tactics from aggressive
> confrontation to mutual satisfaction, and have found that it serves their
> practice far more humanely than they would have expected.
> At this point, although I certainly have a point of view, my commitment
> is
> not to get dragged into the 'tit for tat' level of argument as to who is
> right
> or wrong, and whether what was done was right or wrong.. My intention is
> to
> protect the GPS-DRO, which should remain a neutral organization, from
> being
> improperly led by those who are acting with a conflict of interest when
> they
> speak out adamantly. I will not yet speak out directly on my point of
> view,
> whether it appears to others to be obvious or not, as I do not wish to
> enter
> into the same errors that I feel they have made. I am simply attempting
> to
> stand in the middle and create a more positive and harmonious way of
> dealing
> with all of this. I hope that I can be effective in doing so.
> Perhaps we will meet tomorrow. May we all grow in understanding each
> other,
> and practicing kindness as we walk and work together. Varda.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Opinion Survey Opinion Survey
This post is for people to voice their concerns about opinion surveys and emails. As they are very important subjects critical to the well-being of the graduate & professional student body, you are encouraged to devote your time and energy to addressing them in a thoughtful and well-reasoned manner.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
Friday, November 16, 2007
Unimpeachable Evidence of Cynical Opportunism
To post further proof to the blog, send it to me or request that I give you publishing permission.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Status of Office Staff
Greetings:
It has been a busy week…with meetings on the golf course issue, student
legislative priorities with the alumni group Lobos for Legislation, the
steering committee for the Office of Institutional Diversity, the
Student Fee Review Board…and so I am just catching up on email.
I see that there is concern about the GPSA office staff situation. This
is a crucial issue and I understand that some people are disgruntled. I
definitely accept some of the blame cast my way, but there have been
some misconceptions along the way that only make the issue murkier. Let
me try to set the record straight.
In the Spring of 2006, the GPSA Council passed a resolution calling on
the future GPSA President to hire a 3/4 time staff person for the
office. Part of the rationale for the resolution was that this is how
ASUNM staffs its office. I was not GPSA President at the time.
When I entered the Presidency, I was set to perform this task, but when
I tried to hire that staff person I was informed by Debbie Morris,
Student Activities Director, that I could not because the previous
President and Finance Committee Chair had not funded the position in
their annual budget. So it wasn't until the budget for this year was in
place and red tape cleared that the things were ready to set the wheels
in motion to eventually perform this hire.
Of course hiring somebody through the proper administrative and human
resource channels couldn't take place overnight. Around this same time,
summer semester, all three of the part-time graduate/professional
student office employees left at around the same time. So the office had
to be immediately staffed by getting new graduate/professional student
employment; the formal admin hiring process would not fill the office
quick enough for the summer needs.
There was a graduate student who was actually staying in Albuquerque for
the summer and seeking on campus work, so this graduate student was
hired to make sure the office would remain open all summer. At the time
this person was an acquaintance of mine who had been in a class with me;
this person was not a "close friend". That this person became a friend
is a function of us working in close proximity; not the other way
around. No other person approached me looking for work at the time the
office needed filling. So I reject the notion that somebody was hired
just because they were a friend. And I will not apologize for becoming
friends with people. In fact I was friends with the previous part-time
graduate/professional student employees, but nobody questioned those
friendships (maybe because those people are personally better liked by
the questioners.)
Anyway, the office was sufficiently staffed over the summer, maintaining
regular open office hours for use of the computer lab and conference
room. After the summer ended, the graduate student employee had to cut
down on hours because of classes starting, so we needed to find another
graduate/professional student to help out. One acquaintance of mine who
is active in community affairs approached me about part-time employment
to supplement his graduate assistantship, so I brought that person on to
make sure the office would be open full hours all week. Again, no other
person approached me about helping out at the office. And again, I only
tangentially knew that person at the time of them coming here; they
weren't a "close friend". Once again I reject those charges and make no
apologies for becoming friends with somebody. It is a low point when
people indict the beautiful concept of friendship--a sign of the
unnecessary unproductive negativity ascendant in and around the GPSA.
Anyway, while we took the steps to hire a ¾ time admin, the office has
been open everyday upwards of ten hours per day. To ensure that the
office is open all the time and help available, I exercised the
president's constitutional prerogative of handling employment and
assigning tasks in order to fulfill the constitutional duty of
maintaining office hours. Although not all GPSA members come to the
office to get information or use the facilities, those that do probably
appreciate the open door and friendly attitudes. Anyway, jump to the
process to hire an admin.
The first step was to create a job description. First, a member of the
executive board drafted a job description. Then the executive board met
to discuss it. At that point another GPSA member made some other
recommendations for the position. Then the executive board tasked a
third person with integrating the two descriptions and coming up with a
final draft. This person did in fact take too much time in integrating
the descriptions and drafting a polished document. I take personal
responsibility for letting this take overly long and not fulfilling my
role as a taskmaster. I apologize for this temporary failure of properly
doing my managerial duties. It was a mistake to assign the task of
drafting the job description to the person that would be replaced. I
know that seems logical; but I didn't come to that realization it until
it was taking too long. After I asked about the job description it
finally made its way to my desk. From this point, as I reported in the
last council meeting, I sent the job description to human resources and
student activities. After a few days, they sent the job description back
to my office noting some wording problems in the description. I attended
to the changes. Because of this type of recurring bureaucratic
obstacles, I too share the frustration at the slow pace of setting
wheels in motion for the hire. But I do accept responsibility for the
mistakes I made, for sometimes getting distracted by the many things I
have to do as president, let alone as a student. Anyway, human resources
is working on this.
Now I would like to have a discussion on the bill to create project
assistantships, however I want that issue to be discussed on the merits
alone, not intruded upon by the accusations of the mistakes that I have
or haven't made. So in this letter, I will not bring up my ideas on the
issue. But I would like to say that the bill is not a means for me to be
able "to hire close friends"; this is not about me. It is about the
future of the GPSA. I am a lame duck president. This bill would apply to
the GPSA in years to come, involve other presidents.
Also, it needs to be pointed out that while the council passed language
for an admin, there was a debate on the issue, but at the end of a six
hour meeting, the last one of the year. The council was told that it had
to pass the budget in that meeting, and so some councilors with
reservations on the admin position still voted to pass the budget (where
the admin was mentioned) since the meeting was taking so long and a
budget had to be passed. Just saying so the issue is construed in the
proper light.
I encourage a healthy debate on the bill creating project
assistantships, but on the merits, not tied to concerns people have
about the current process which I have explained. Please feel free to
criticize me; I am responsible for some of the problems and also
frustrated by the pace of things with red tape. But please separate
complaints against me from the talks on the pros and cons of project
assistantships. I do not want whatever failures I have occasioned to
influence debate on the way toward future success of the GPSA.
Finally, I encourage all GPSA members to feel free to come to talk with
me. I understand that some people prefer anonymity--which is
understandable given the negativity and personal attacks that have
arisen in council meetings and on the listserv--and you would lose
anonymity by meeting in person. But please know that my door is always
open--literally--and I am available to further explain my actions as
well as discuss the benefits of project assistantships. We will post
this letter on the blog so there can be discussion without clogging up
the listserv.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Joseph J. García
President
Graduate and Professional Student Association (GPSA)
Ph.D. Student, Latin American Studies
Celullar: (505) 400-3802
Phone: (505) 277-3803
Fax: (505) 277-4159
http://www.unm.edu/~gpsa
It has been a busy week…with meetings on the golf course issue, student
legislative priorities with the alumni group Lobos for Legislation, the
steering committee for the Office of Institutional Diversity, the
Student Fee Review Board…and so I am just catching up on email.
I see that there is concern about the GPSA office staff situation. This
is a crucial issue and I understand that some people are disgruntled. I
definitely accept some of the blame cast my way, but there have been
some misconceptions along the way that only make the issue murkier. Let
me try to set the record straight.
In the Spring of 2006, the GPSA Council passed a resolution calling on
the future GPSA President to hire a 3/4 time staff person for the
office. Part of the rationale for the resolution was that this is how
ASUNM staffs its office. I was not GPSA President at the time.
When I entered the Presidency, I was set to perform this task, but when
I tried to hire that staff person I was informed by Debbie Morris,
Student Activities Director, that I could not because the previous
President and Finance Committee Chair had not funded the position in
their annual budget. So it wasn't until the budget for this year was in
place and red tape cleared that the things were ready to set the wheels
in motion to eventually perform this hire.
Of course hiring somebody through the proper administrative and human
resource channels couldn't take place overnight. Around this same time,
summer semester, all three of the part-time graduate/professional
student office employees left at around the same time. So the office had
to be immediately staffed by getting new graduate/professional student
employment; the formal admin hiring process would not fill the office
quick enough for the summer needs.
There was a graduate student who was actually staying in Albuquerque for
the summer and seeking on campus work, so this graduate student was
hired to make sure the office would remain open all summer. At the time
this person was an acquaintance of mine who had been in a class with me;
this person was not a "close friend". That this person became a friend
is a function of us working in close proximity; not the other way
around. No other person approached me looking for work at the time the
office needed filling. So I reject the notion that somebody was hired
just because they were a friend. And I will not apologize for becoming
friends with people. In fact I was friends with the previous part-time
graduate/professional student employees, but nobody questioned those
friendships (maybe because those people are personally better liked by
the questioners.)
Anyway, the office was sufficiently staffed over the summer, maintaining
regular open office hours for use of the computer lab and conference
room. After the summer ended, the graduate student employee had to cut
down on hours because of classes starting, so we needed to find another
graduate/professional student to help out. One acquaintance of mine who
is active in community affairs approached me about part-time employment
to supplement his graduate assistantship, so I brought that person on to
make sure the office would be open full hours all week. Again, no other
person approached me about helping out at the office. And again, I only
tangentially knew that person at the time of them coming here; they
weren't a "close friend". Once again I reject those charges and make no
apologies for becoming friends with somebody. It is a low point when
people indict the beautiful concept of friendship--a sign of the
unnecessary unproductive negativity ascendant in and around the GPSA.
Anyway, while we took the steps to hire a ¾ time admin, the office has
been open everyday upwards of ten hours per day. To ensure that the
office is open all the time and help available, I exercised the
president's constitutional prerogative of handling employment and
assigning tasks in order to fulfill the constitutional duty of
maintaining office hours. Although not all GPSA members come to the
office to get information or use the facilities, those that do probably
appreciate the open door and friendly attitudes. Anyway, jump to the
process to hire an admin.
The first step was to create a job description. First, a member of the
executive board drafted a job description. Then the executive board met
to discuss it. At that point another GPSA member made some other
recommendations for the position. Then the executive board tasked a
third person with integrating the two descriptions and coming up with a
final draft. This person did in fact take too much time in integrating
the descriptions and drafting a polished document. I take personal
responsibility for letting this take overly long and not fulfilling my
role as a taskmaster. I apologize for this temporary failure of properly
doing my managerial duties. It was a mistake to assign the task of
drafting the job description to the person that would be replaced. I
know that seems logical; but I didn't come to that realization it until
it was taking too long. After I asked about the job description it
finally made its way to my desk. From this point, as I reported in the
last council meeting, I sent the job description to human resources and
student activities. After a few days, they sent the job description back
to my office noting some wording problems in the description. I attended
to the changes. Because of this type of recurring bureaucratic
obstacles, I too share the frustration at the slow pace of setting
wheels in motion for the hire. But I do accept responsibility for the
mistakes I made, for sometimes getting distracted by the many things I
have to do as president, let alone as a student. Anyway, human resources
is working on this.
Now I would like to have a discussion on the bill to create project
assistantships, however I want that issue to be discussed on the merits
alone, not intruded upon by the accusations of the mistakes that I have
or haven't made. So in this letter, I will not bring up my ideas on the
issue. But I would like to say that the bill is not a means for me to be
able "to hire close friends"; this is not about me. It is about the
future of the GPSA. I am a lame duck president. This bill would apply to
the GPSA in years to come, involve other presidents.
Also, it needs to be pointed out that while the council passed language
for an admin, there was a debate on the issue, but at the end of a six
hour meeting, the last one of the year. The council was told that it had
to pass the budget in that meeting, and so some councilors with
reservations on the admin position still voted to pass the budget (where
the admin was mentioned) since the meeting was taking so long and a
budget had to be passed. Just saying so the issue is construed in the
proper light.
I encourage a healthy debate on the bill creating project
assistantships, but on the merits, not tied to concerns people have
about the current process which I have explained. Please feel free to
criticize me; I am responsible for some of the problems and also
frustrated by the pace of things with red tape. But please separate
complaints against me from the talks on the pros and cons of project
assistantships. I do not want whatever failures I have occasioned to
influence debate on the way toward future success of the GPSA.
Finally, I encourage all GPSA members to feel free to come to talk with
me. I understand that some people prefer anonymity--which is
understandable given the negativity and personal attacks that have
arisen in council meetings and on the listserv--and you would lose
anonymity by meeting in person. But please know that my door is always
open--literally--and I am available to further explain my actions as
well as discuss the benefits of project assistantships. We will post
this letter on the blog so there can be discussion without clogging up
the listserv.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,
Joseph J. García
President
Graduate and Professional Student Association (GPSA)
Ph.D. Student, Latin American Studies
Celullar: (505) 400-3802
Phone: (505) 277-3803
Fax: (505) 277-4159
http://www.unm.edu/~gpsa
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Monday, November 5, 2007
Get your diverse privilege on!
This is an open thread where you can rant, throw verbal barbs, cry foul, accuse, applaud, admit, criticize, be hypocritical, be hyperbolic, ruminate, revolt, be revolting, make comrades, make enemies, make whoopy, and make nice. Enter at your own risk. Just try not to get your privilege on the furniture.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Diversity Requirement Recommendation
The Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee has sought graduate and professional student input on the following recommendations for a diversity component in degree programs. The diversity recommendations will be discussed at the next FSCC meeting, Friday 2 November 2007 at 10AM in the Roberts room on the second floor of Scholes Hall (The diversity discussion is listed toward the bottom of the agenda so it may not come up until closer to 11AM).
To: Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee
From: Subcommittee on Diversity
Re: Draft: Diversity Requirement Recommendation Revisions
Date: September 27, 2007
Recommendation: All undergraduate and graduate degrees programs will have a requirement af one three credit hour class that meets the university diversity guidelines. The course would be selected from a designated list of approved courses. The requirement would have to be fulfilled by degree completion.
Rationale: Curricula should reflect an approach to diversity that recognizes all forms including race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, physical and mentally challenged individuals and other underrepresented or marginalized groups in society.
The committee believes that we should support the teaching of diversity across the curriculum and that students will greatly benefit by selecting a course of their choice available throughout their academic experience.
Operational Process for Implementation:
1. The FSCC and Faculty Senate would initially develop and approve specific themes and outcomes that would serve as guidelines for courses deemed appropriate for this requirement. This would allow for a coherent set of themes and outcomes of the courses relative to diversity but allow for different disciplines to participate and express these themes through a variety of perspectives.
2. The criteria developed would be distributed to all departments through a designated point of origin: the Vice Provost’s Office, Registrar’s Office, and Office of Diversity etc.
3. Course syllabi should be developed or modified accordingly at the department level. They should explicitly address the designated themes and outcomes in order to be eligible and approved as courses that will fulfill the “diversity” requirement for graduation.
Examples of themes are: pluralism, social justice, communication skills, historical context & perspectives relative to marginalized groups.
Examples of outcomes might include:
* The student will demonstrate the ability to listen and respond to views different from ones own.
* The student will examine personal bias and its impact on the degree to which people are judgmental.
* The student will demonstrate the meaning of pluralism and give examples of its impact in society through economic, educational and social institutions.
* The student will relate the historical antecedents that influence or perpetuate inequities for marginalized groups.
* The student will analyze the historical context and its impact on the evolution and sustainability of a particular group.
* The student will compare and contrast similarities and differences between cultural and ethnic groups.
o The student will demonstrate the application of strategies for peace making and conflict resolution.
4. Departmentally approved syllabi will be forwarded to the Undergraduate, and or Graduate Committee, and FSCC for final approval.
To: Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee
From: Subcommittee on Diversity
Re: Draft: Diversity Requirement Recommendation Revisions
Date: September 27, 2007
Recommendation: All undergraduate and graduate degrees programs will have a requirement af one three credit hour class that meets the university diversity guidelines. The course would be selected from a designated list of approved courses. The requirement would have to be fulfilled by degree completion.
Rationale: Curricula should reflect an approach to diversity that recognizes all forms including race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation, physical and mentally challenged individuals and other underrepresented or marginalized groups in society.
The committee believes that we should support the teaching of diversity across the curriculum and that students will greatly benefit by selecting a course of their choice available throughout their academic experience.
Operational Process for Implementation:
1. The FSCC and Faculty Senate would initially develop and approve specific themes and outcomes that would serve as guidelines for courses deemed appropriate for this requirement. This would allow for a coherent set of themes and outcomes of the courses relative to diversity but allow for different disciplines to participate and express these themes through a variety of perspectives.
2. The criteria developed would be distributed to all departments through a designated point of origin: the Vice Provost’s Office, Registrar’s Office, and Office of Diversity etc.
3. Course syllabi should be developed or modified accordingly at the department level. They should explicitly address the designated themes and outcomes in order to be eligible and approved as courses that will fulfill the “diversity” requirement for graduation.
Examples of themes are: pluralism, social justice, communication skills, historical context & perspectives relative to marginalized groups.
Examples of outcomes might include:
* The student will demonstrate the ability to listen and respond to views different from ones own.
* The student will examine personal bias and its impact on the degree to which people are judgmental.
* The student will demonstrate the meaning of pluralism and give examples of its impact in society through economic, educational and social institutions.
* The student will relate the historical antecedents that influence or perpetuate inequities for marginalized groups.
* The student will analyze the historical context and its impact on the evolution and sustainability of a particular group.
* The student will compare and contrast similarities and differences between cultural and ethnic groups.
o The student will demonstrate the application of strategies for peace making and conflict resolution.
4. Departmentally approved syllabi will be forwarded to the Undergraduate, and or Graduate Committee, and FSCC for final approval.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Antidiscrimination Resolution Passed
This Resolution by the Council of the Graduate and Professional Student Association concerning discrimination at the University of New Mexico is adopted on October 9, 2007.
WHEREAS The University of New Mexico is an educational and academic community committed to diversity, equity and freedom from persecution for all students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS The Graduate and Professional Student Association (henceforth GPSA) advocates on behalf of all graduate and professional students at University of New Mexico (henceforth UNM);
WHEREAS The GPSA is committed to improving the general situation of graduate and professional students, specifically creating an environment in which all students are free from all forms of discrimination which include but are not limited to age, ancestry, national origin, color, race, gender identity, medical condition, mental or physical disability, religion, sex, sexual harassment, sexual orientation, spousal affiliation, and veteran status;1
WHEREAS In the event of discrimination the Office of Equal Opportunity has set up a grievance procedure available to victims of discrimination, including students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS The Office of Equal Opportunity grievance procedure is inadequately advertised and not readily available to students, staff and faculty;
IT IS RESOLVED That the GPSA will take on a leadership role and continue to advocate against discrimination on UNM campus;
IT IS RESOLVED That GPSA in conjunction with the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will set up guidelines for educational trainings/workshops about discrimination, hate crimes and tolerance for all student organizations;
IT IS RESOLVED That the GPSA will request that the Office of Equal Opportunity make their policies and procedures in relation to discrimination and harassment widely available and advertised at the beginning of each semester (through brochures and other publications, i.e. Daily Lobo) to all students, staff and faculty;
IT IS RESOLVED That the GPSA will sponsor forums and discussions to promote an atmosphere of tolerance and understanding at UNM.
1 Protected classes identified by the UNM Office of Equal Opportunity (www.unm.edu/~ oeounm/index.htm)
WHEREAS The University of New Mexico is an educational and academic community committed to diversity, equity and freedom from persecution for all students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS The Graduate and Professional Student Association (henceforth GPSA) advocates on behalf of all graduate and professional students at University of New Mexico (henceforth UNM);
WHEREAS The GPSA is committed to improving the general situation of graduate and professional students, specifically creating an environment in which all students are free from all forms of discrimination which include but are not limited to age, ancestry, national origin, color, race, gender identity, medical condition, mental or physical disability, religion, sex, sexual harassment, sexual orientation, spousal affiliation, and veteran status;1
WHEREAS In the event of discrimination the Office of Equal Opportunity has set up a grievance procedure available to victims of discrimination, including students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS The Office of Equal Opportunity grievance procedure is inadequately advertised and not readily available to students, staff and faculty;
IT IS RESOLVED That the GPSA will take on a leadership role and continue to advocate against discrimination on UNM campus;
IT IS RESOLVED That GPSA in conjunction with the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will set up guidelines for educational trainings/workshops about discrimination, hate crimes and tolerance for all student organizations;
IT IS RESOLVED That the GPSA will request that the Office of Equal Opportunity make their policies and procedures in relation to discrimination and harassment widely available and advertised at the beginning of each semester (through brochures and other publications, i.e. Daily Lobo) to all students, staff and faculty;
IT IS RESOLVED That the GPSA will sponsor forums and discussions to promote an atmosphere of tolerance and understanding at UNM.
1 Protected classes identified by the UNM Office of Equal Opportunity (www.unm.edu/~ oeounm/index.htm)
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Revised Resolution
The authors of the original resolution wish to have this revised resolution proposed at this evening's meeting.
FR07-008: Anti-Discrimination
WHEREAS the University of New Mexico is an educational and academic community committed to diversity, equity and freedom of persecution for all students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS the Graduate and Professional Student Association (henceforth GPSA) advocates on behalf of all graduate and professional students at University of New Mexico (henceforth UNM);
WHEREAS the GPSA is committed to improving the general situation of graduate and professional students, specifically creating an environment in which all students are free of racial, ethnic, gender, and sexual discrimination;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination the Office of Equal Opportunity has set up a grievance procedure available to victims of discrimination, including students, staff and faculty;
IT IS RESOLVED that the GPSA will take on a leadership role and continue to advocate against hate crimes and discrimination on UNM campus,
IT IS RESOLVED that the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will house a committee of students (appointed by ASUNM, the GPSA, and includes at least one undergraduate students, one graduate/professional student, one female student, and one international student), staff and faculty from a variety of departments, schools and colleges, that will develop a clear list of procedures for reporting, investigating and handle formal grievances in handling possible cases of hate crimes,
IT IS RESOLVED that GPSA will appoint a representative to a committee which will work with the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity in drafting procedures to deal with complaints of hate crimes which are 1) accessible to students, staff and faculty; 2) observe the principles of social justice and equal rights; 3) provide clear instructions and easy access to the University community to deal with incidents motivated by racial and ethnic hatred; and finally 4) protect the victims, complainant, or any person associated with a complainant,
IT IS RESOLVED that GPSA will appoint a representative to the committee which will handle grievances and follow the procedures set forth to handle cases of hate crimes and discrimination.
IT IS RESOLVED that the Office of Equal Opportunity will make their policies and procedures in relation to discrimination and harassment widely available and advertised at the beginning of each semester (though brochures and other publications, i.e. Daily Lobo) to all students, staff and faculty.
Antihate Task Force
UNM Hate Crimes Policy: President Schmidly has requested GPSA’s review and recommendations based on the report of the task force.
Report of the “Hate Crimes” Task Force
The University of New Mexico is committed to creating a rich educational environment,
with robust intellectual discourse, debate and conflict that is free from hate. But, this is
not always possible; there are times when “hate speech” may occur in an open
environment such as a university community. Of course, the University of New Mexico
is committed to supporting academic freedom and supports freedom of speech. Thus, we
believe that the University’s responses to "hate speech” and “hate incidents" should
involve education and processes rather than censorship and punishment. We believe that
the University of New Mexico can accomplish this with the creation of an office charged
with addressing these issues through education, counseling, research and transparency.
Thus, the following are our recommendations:
The administration should create a "Campus Climate Office” that will:
1) provide a "first response" to inappropriate incidents of hate speech or
conduct. (Any conduct that violates criminal laws or UNM policies or codes of conduct
will be referred to the appropriate authorities such as, for example, Campus Police, OEO,
or the dean of students);
2) work with individuals and groups to resolve incidents of hate speech and
conduct appropriately;
3) counsel victims of hate speech and conduct and others concerned about these
issues;
4) educate the University community about first amendment and academic
freedom principles as they apply to the University environment;
5) educate the campus community about appropriate intellectual discourse and
conduct in a pluralistic environment; and,
6) conduct research and publish an annual report about hate speech and conduct
on campus to assess the University climate.
This office should report directly to the president (or his designee) but may be physically
located in the dean of students’ suite. The office will have authority to flexibly resolve
conflict in which hate speech or conduct is involved using a variety of techniques. The
office should be well trained in anti-racism, sexual harassment, ageism, gender
discrimination, gay & lesbian issues, bi-sexual, transsexual and Queer and Questioning
issues, disability and religious and cultural intolerance.
There should be an ongoing commitment of financial and administrative resources to
support the work of the office. The following is a suggested budget for the salaries
required for the office:
Director:
$90,000.00
Support staff:
$50,000.00
Counselors:
$70,000.00
Annual Research Budget
$30,000-$40,000
Submitted Jan. 23, 2007 by Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, Chair
Report of the “Hate Crimes” Task Force
The University of New Mexico is committed to creating a rich educational environment,
with robust intellectual discourse, debate and conflict that is free from hate. But, this is
not always possible; there are times when “hate speech” may occur in an open
environment such as a university community. Of course, the University of New Mexico
is committed to supporting academic freedom and supports freedom of speech. Thus, we
believe that the University’s responses to "hate speech” and “hate incidents" should
involve education and processes rather than censorship and punishment. We believe that
the University of New Mexico can accomplish this with the creation of an office charged
with addressing these issues through education, counseling, research and transparency.
Thus, the following are our recommendations:
The administration should create a "Campus Climate Office” that will:
1) provide a "first response" to inappropriate incidents of hate speech or
conduct. (Any conduct that violates criminal laws or UNM policies or codes of conduct
will be referred to the appropriate authorities such as, for example, Campus Police, OEO,
or the dean of students);
2) work with individuals and groups to resolve incidents of hate speech and
conduct appropriately;
3) counsel victims of hate speech and conduct and others concerned about these
issues;
4) educate the University community about first amendment and academic
freedom principles as they apply to the University environment;
5) educate the campus community about appropriate intellectual discourse and
conduct in a pluralistic environment; and,
6) conduct research and publish an annual report about hate speech and conduct
on campus to assess the University climate.
This office should report directly to the president (or his designee) but may be physically
located in the dean of students’ suite. The office will have authority to flexibly resolve
conflict in which hate speech or conduct is involved using a variety of techniques. The
office should be well trained in anti-racism, sexual harassment, ageism, gender
discrimination, gay & lesbian issues, bi-sexual, transsexual and Queer and Questioning
issues, disability and religious and cultural intolerance.
There should be an ongoing commitment of financial and administrative resources to
support the work of the office. The following is a suggested budget for the salaries
required for the office:
Director:
$90,000.00
Support staff:
$50,000.00
Counselors:
$70,000.00
Annual Research Budget
$30,000-$40,000
Submitted Jan. 23, 2007 by Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, Chair
FR07-008: Anti-Discrimination
FR07-008: Anti-Discrimination
WHEREAS the University of New Mexico is an educational and academic community committed to diversity, equity and freedom of persecution for all students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS the Graduate and Professional Student Association (henceforth GPSA) advocates on behalf of all graduate and professional students at University of New Mexico (henceforth UNM);
WHEREAS the GPSA is committed to improving the general situation of graduate and professional students, specifically creating an environment in which all students are free of racial, ethnic, gender, and sexual discrimination;
WHEREAS prevention of discrimination and hate motivated violence against students of color, women and international students are a direct result of the failure of institutional bodies to clearly define, publicly advertise and address what constitutes discrimination and hate crimes;
WHEREAS recent events of discrimination and hate crimes on a national level, most notably exemplified in the case of Jena 6 High School students of Jena, LA, calls for action at the University level in order to ensure proper response and action by the institutional bodies to events motivated by racial hatred;
WHEREAS recent events at UNM involving discrimination against Native American students in public forums, physical assault against international students of Indian decent, desecration of a Mexican flag, and violence against women committed by an undergraduate fraternity member show that immediate action must be taken to ensure such events are not repeated in the future;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination the Office of Equal Opportunity has set up a grievance procedure available to victims of discrimination, including students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS the Office of Equal Opportunity grievance procedure is poorly advertised and not readily available to students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS in the event of hate crimes, there are currently no clear grievance procedures outlined by the University or the Office of Institutional Diversity through which graduate and professional students (or any other members of the University community) at UNM can ensure such events are officially reported and investigated, and the perpetrators of the crimes are held accountable;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination and hate crimes committed by members of chartered organizations (funded by student fees) the University and the Office of Institutional Diversity do not require any type of educational and/or tolerance training for the members of the organizations with a history of discrimination and/or hate crimes;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination and hate crimes, there are no proceedings that ensure public knowledge about the particulars of the incidents;
WHEREAS events of discrimination and hate crime are often represented (within University publications and reports) as isolated acts of violence (rather than acts of violence fueled by racial and ethnic hatred) and are often removed from the public eye in order to maintain the image of harmony;
IT IS RESOLVED that the GPSA will take on a leadership role and continue to advocate against hate crimes and discrimination on UNM campus,
IT IS RESOLVED that the GPSA will advocate for graduate and professional students who have been victims of hate crimes or discrimination,
IT IS RESOLVED that the Office of Equal Opportunity will make their policies and procedures in relation to discrimination and harassment widely available and advertised at the beginning of each semester (though brochures and other publications, i.e. Daily Lobo) to all students, staff and faculty,
IT IS RESOLVED that the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will house a committee of students (appointed by ASUNM, the GPSA, and includes at least one undergraduate students, one graduate/professional student, one female student, and one international student), staff and faculty from a variety of departments, schools and colleges, that will develop a clear list of procedures for reporting, investigating and handle formal grievances in handling possible cases of hate crimes,
IT IS RESOLVED that GPSA will appoint a representative to a committee which will work with the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity in drafting procedures to deal with complaints of hate crimes which are 1) accessible to students, staff and faculty; 2) observe the principles of social justice and equal rights; 3) provide clear instructions and easy access to the University community to deal with incidents motivated by racial and ethnic hatred; and finally 4) protect the victims, complainant, or any person associated with a complainant,
IT IS RESOLVED that GPSA will appoint a representative to the committee which will handle grievances and follow the procedures set forth to handle cases of hate crimes,
IT IS RESOLVED that the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will set up educational trainings/workshops about discrimination, hate crimes and tolerance for all student organizations at the beginning of each semester,
IT IS RESOLVED that any organization funded by student fees that refuses trainings/workshops will be stripped of their funding because they are acting against University diversity policy,
IT IS RESOLVED the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will be responsible for publicizing any events of discrimination and hate crimes (if permitted by the complainant) to all students, staff and faculty in a manner that represents events and facts.
WHEREAS the University of New Mexico is an educational and academic community committed to diversity, equity and freedom of persecution for all students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS the Graduate and Professional Student Association (henceforth GPSA) advocates on behalf of all graduate and professional students at University of New Mexico (henceforth UNM);
WHEREAS the GPSA is committed to improving the general situation of graduate and professional students, specifically creating an environment in which all students are free of racial, ethnic, gender, and sexual discrimination;
WHEREAS prevention of discrimination and hate motivated violence against students of color, women and international students are a direct result of the failure of institutional bodies to clearly define, publicly advertise and address what constitutes discrimination and hate crimes;
WHEREAS recent events of discrimination and hate crimes on a national level, most notably exemplified in the case of Jena 6 High School students of Jena, LA, calls for action at the University level in order to ensure proper response and action by the institutional bodies to events motivated by racial hatred;
WHEREAS recent events at UNM involving discrimination against Native American students in public forums, physical assault against international students of Indian decent, desecration of a Mexican flag, and violence against women committed by an undergraduate fraternity member show that immediate action must be taken to ensure such events are not repeated in the future;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination the Office of Equal Opportunity has set up a grievance procedure available to victims of discrimination, including students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS the Office of Equal Opportunity grievance procedure is poorly advertised and not readily available to students, staff and faculty;
WHEREAS in the event of hate crimes, there are currently no clear grievance procedures outlined by the University or the Office of Institutional Diversity through which graduate and professional students (or any other members of the University community) at UNM can ensure such events are officially reported and investigated, and the perpetrators of the crimes are held accountable;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination and hate crimes committed by members of chartered organizations (funded by student fees) the University and the Office of Institutional Diversity do not require any type of educational and/or tolerance training for the members of the organizations with a history of discrimination and/or hate crimes;
WHEREAS in the event of discrimination and hate crimes, there are no proceedings that ensure public knowledge about the particulars of the incidents;
WHEREAS events of discrimination and hate crime are often represented (within University publications and reports) as isolated acts of violence (rather than acts of violence fueled by racial and ethnic hatred) and are often removed from the public eye in order to maintain the image of harmony;
IT IS RESOLVED that the GPSA will take on a leadership role and continue to advocate against hate crimes and discrimination on UNM campus,
IT IS RESOLVED that the GPSA will advocate for graduate and professional students who have been victims of hate crimes or discrimination,
IT IS RESOLVED that the Office of Equal Opportunity will make their policies and procedures in relation to discrimination and harassment widely available and advertised at the beginning of each semester (though brochures and other publications, i.e. Daily Lobo) to all students, staff and faculty,
IT IS RESOLVED that the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will house a committee of students (appointed by ASUNM, the GPSA, and includes at least one undergraduate students, one graduate/professional student, one female student, and one international student), staff and faculty from a variety of departments, schools and colleges, that will develop a clear list of procedures for reporting, investigating and handle formal grievances in handling possible cases of hate crimes,
IT IS RESOLVED that GPSA will appoint a representative to a committee which will work with the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity in drafting procedures to deal with complaints of hate crimes which are 1) accessible to students, staff and faculty; 2) observe the principles of social justice and equal rights; 3) provide clear instructions and easy access to the University community to deal with incidents motivated by racial and ethnic hatred; and finally 4) protect the victims, complainant, or any person associated with a complainant,
IT IS RESOLVED that GPSA will appoint a representative to the committee which will handle grievances and follow the procedures set forth to handle cases of hate crimes,
IT IS RESOLVED that the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will set up educational trainings/workshops about discrimination, hate crimes and tolerance for all student organizations at the beginning of each semester,
IT IS RESOLVED that any organization funded by student fees that refuses trainings/workshops will be stripped of their funding because they are acting against University diversity policy,
IT IS RESOLVED the University administration and the Office of Institutional Diversity will be responsible for publicizing any events of discrimination and hate crimes (if permitted by the complainant) to all students, staff and faculty in a manner that represents events and facts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)