Full Faculty Town Hall Notes
AHCS GSA
The Art History & Communication Studies Graduate Students’ Association (McGill University)
Agenda for Full Faculty Town Hall
March 15, Arts 160, 10:00 AM to 11:30 AM
1. Approval of the agenda
2. Student Topics
a. Miscellaneous Questions (posed by the GSA)
Since Amelia Jones' departure, Christine is now the only professor in Contemporary Art. Are there any plans to hire a new professor to expand the department’s offerings?
Faculty: This is a top priority, which has been submitted to university and should be resolved soon. Department has been putting pressure on the administration to fill position with someone who deals with issues of globalization.
Our department now has the third professor of East Asian studies in the last few years. Is there a problem with this position that makes people leave so often? Should it be re-evaluated?
Faculty: All of these professors left for different reasons. It is a challenging position since this professor is responsible for two departments. The most recent professor in the position was hired with tenure. Offering tenure is a huge relief for the position.
How does the department plan to rectify the dearth of teaching opportunities for Ph.D. students and the negative impact this will have for them in an already competitive and precarious job market?
Faculty: The new collective agreement between lecturers’ union and university obliges AHCS Dept. to hire students with prior teaching experience. University says it’s going to try to rectify this as soon as next collective agreement comes up, although this will not necessarily help students already in the program. Currently, no more than two AH jobs and two CS jobs can be offered to students (but often the Dept. can only offer less, due to class numbers). Faculty still encourage students to apply for TAships and reminds that “course exclusions” are worse in other depts.
Dept. recognizes that the ability to teach is really important -- it intends to try to find middle ground. (Dept. Chair)
It’s a difficult situation, because there are good reasons for course lecturer unions to fight for protections, although in a small program like ours fewer protections are needed. The Dept. is trying to find strategies with the union at the time of renegotiation to protect both lecturers and students. We need to work together constructively as a community to find a creative solution that will serve all interests. (GPD)
GSA may have more power than Dept. to advocate for students on this topic (UPD)
Union politics is something to contend with. Also, there are four other universities with job teaching opportunities. On May 1, offerings from different universities are posted. (jake)
Trying to think of alternatives.. maybe there’s a way to rethink the TAships, we need TAs to grade! Is co-teaching an option? (Christine)
Co-teaching is possible, but we have to anticipate that need when we post positions. There are rules about posting (Dept. Chair)
We are thinking about being proactive with 200-level class, meets intensely and would benefit from shared teaching. (UPD)
Pay would be split in half, in this instance. (Dept. Chair)
A second year PhD student is concerned about funding for the third year. Is there new information concerning this matter or will this only be revealed during the summer?
Funding is reflected in the letter of offer, and will adhere to that. We will be satisfying hard commitments and try to distribute funds to the rest of the cohort up to the pledges given. Aiming for sometime in late June for notification of what individual packages will look like, but notification will happen as early as possible (GPD)
b. Gendered Student Labour
I’ve seen this at events and people have spoken to me about this as well. We need to encourage our students to volunteer so it doesn’t fall on the same people all the time. It’s shared division of labour and gendered nature of that division. (Carrie)
People see what value is placed on that labour and what occurs in the long-run. If we are trying to create a space of openness, how do we convince our male counterparts that this is a valuable role. (jake)
It’s also the fact that in Art History, most students are women. Maybe it’s good to focus in on the uncompensated work. We know there’s a culture out there of women taking care of others. Are male colleagues so well-funded that they don’t need to be present. (Christine)
We have really good faculty models in splitting labour. No lack of model for this. In past, male students helped build student culture. What has changed? Grad cultures change over time, depending on who’s coming into the department. I see more informal volunteer work happening around certain faculty, and maybe not at a departmental level. (Carrie)
Ask students to participate in Speaker Series reception set-up/clean-up in order to attend dinner. (Victoria)
Last couple of years gender dynamic has shifted… should make more effort at orientation to get male students involved from GPD and Chair. (GPD)
Male students attend Speaker Series there’s no shortage of male attendees, but they don’t help. (Zoe)
Women are taking their place as students and researchers - it’s a decision making process to do this work. You can get something out of it to be volunteering, so women are getting that experience. (Christine)
There’s benefit in doing some jobs, but it gets banal at some point. So maybe there can be an executive position, or some benefit? (Itza)
Can you make the work a line on your CV, something named? Would that be helpful? (UPD)
I think there’s something valuable in labeling positions, building community, what happens in the social. Maybe we should make public our position as a department about roles in making. (jake)
Can we make a more integrated Speaker Series committee that allows more student ownership and contribution. And we don’t have staff support either, so it is really a lot of work. (Carrie)
Accrediting and naming that labour is important, especially following the erosion of staff support for the department.(jake)
Work does pay off, certainly -- we’ve tried to create spaces for students of interest. But if there’s some connection to something more important to the department, like the Speaker Series, that might motivate students. (Sandra)
I see ways of combining the suggestion of committee structure and making the work professionally and intellectually rewarding for students. We never have anyone respond to a speaker. Imagine a situation that a student suggests a speaker and a student can make a response at the end of a talk to that speaker that could kick off discussion at the end. That could arise from a revamped structure for Speaker Series. Academic leadership, etc. are important categories in writing recommendation letters. (GPD)
We need to recognize there’s no difference between intellectual labour and non-intellectual labour. We need to value care for community. I can see how a restructuring might still result in gendered split in labour. (Carrie)
c. Potential Supervisory Feedback Initiative
Find out if doing in other departments? Already happening in dialogue between student and supervisor, GPD available and Chair available for concerns. (Christine)
Interesting idea - could be invaluable. Might be interesting to have some kind of instrument for feedback. What would that instrument be given need for anonymity? (GPD)
Online survey for general feedback? (Itza)
Feedback needs to be somehow collectivized (GPD)
Annual review for professors in other departments that is some kind of discussion with the Chair? Re issues of supervision which have arisen in the department? So there is a way in which it could be individualized. (Carrie)
University has suggested this - merit exercise, it can also be done on an adhoc basis. I like the idea of students exchanging about this and putting together something generalized - comes from individual experiences, but it is generalized feedback (Dept. Chair)
Supervisors need to be different things to different students at different times - what kind of questions would be consistent to different relationships and different phases in student careers? The idea of institutionalizing one set of criteria - what could hold true for all years? (UPD)
Could try for one year, but has to be constructive. There are different generations of students with different expectations. A few general questions, 4 or 5 recommendations rather than complaints? (Christine)
Survey re supervision? Meeting on supervision every year? (Carrie)
d. Thesis-specific Information Session
Could there be an introductory session for incoming graduate students at the beginning of each school year that goes over the timeline of the thesis (such as initial submission and final submission), as well as requirements (such as maximum page count)?
Maybe Maureen could give something like that? (Christine)
It should be on the web page. I always send students to Maureen as well. (Carrie)
Students could also post this on the GSA website. (Itza)
Make an event in the Fall that discusses these issues? (UPD)
Timelines are something I deal with constantly with people -- they are built back from convocation. Last time we tried to systematize this no one showed up to meetings. (GPD)
We should demystify this at the beginning. The best path is Maureen, I think. (Dept. Chair)
Let’s just create a short document that orients students with typical processes. (Itza)
We did create a more broken down document and posted it online for PhDs. Maybe MA2s need more info. (UPD)
e. ARTH 490: Museum Internship
Clarification on criteria for selecting the internship class and why there is currently no application process? Update from raising this question at the Meet the GPD event?
This involves the Chair and UPD. This is a highly administrative role between program and external organizations, so the steep learning curve involved makes it difficult for regular turn-over. (GPD)
I don’t think this is a GPD issue, although it’s typically a graduate student hired in this position. It’s an increasingly casual employee position, because of the nature of the work. The question is, how does the person get designated? The UPD is the key person there. (Dept. Chair)
This course is the follow up from a summer course internship. I know it’s listed a course on Minerva, but it’s not exactly a course. The UPD is basically getting assistance the second half of a summer internship. It’s a weird thing that is a pride of the UPD, especially now that we lost our administrative program. The undergrads love the program, but it’s not a course or a teaching opportunity. I need to be able to pick the person I’m working with and have them help me for two years. The perception of this course does not reflect the reality of the course. (UPD)
3. Faculty Topics
Travel Funding
Faculty of Arts has dispersed travel funding to each dept. in lump sums -- conference travel is eligible in one bunch and the rest is not. Dept. wants students views on how to distribute these funds -- is it better to have large sums that allow ppl to go away for 2-4 weeks? Meaning fewer students are funded.. Or should there be smaller awards that go to more students? What would students find more valuable? Research funding is the question here. This year it was distributed on an ad hoc basis.
