Interim Report from the Provost's Committee on Graduate Student Teaching
http://provost.uchicago.edu/pdfs/interim_grad_teaching.pdf
Monday, August 25, 2008
Dept. Provost announces increase in grad teaching pay
To: Students, Faculty, and Staff
From: Cathy J. Cohen, Deputy Provost for Graduate Education
Thomas F. Rosenbaum, Provost
Date: August 25, 2008
Re: Increase in Remuneration for Graduate Student Teachers
We are writing to update you on the work and recommendations of the Provost’s Committee on Graduate Student Teaching. We are pleased to announce that we plan to accept the recommendations of the committee, as detailed below. This will result in a significant increase in the remuneration for graduate student teachers, effective during the Autumn Quarter beginning in September.
In February 2008, the Provost, the Deputy Provost for Graduate Education, and the Vice President and Dean of Students established a set of action steps to address some of the key issues raised by graduate students during the previous year. One action was to have the Deputy Provost establish a committee of faculty, graduate students, and administrators to explore issues related to graduate student teaching. The Provost’s Committee was asked initially to focus on issues of remuneration for graduate student teachers, issuing an interim report at the end of Spring Quarter 2008. The Committee would then return to work Autumn Quarter 2008, addressing issues of pedagogical training, delineating graduate student teacher’s responsibilities, reviewing job classifications and the possible need for newly defined positions, and designing a plan to monitor the experience of graduate student teachers in the classroom.
The Committee submitted its interim report to the Provost at the end of June with a set of recommendations regarding remuneration of graduate student teachers. The report can be found in the news section of the Office of the Provost Web site (http://provost.uchicago.edu/). A series of meetings followed to obtain wide feedback on the report. We first met with members of the Committee in early July to discuss their findings and address any outstanding issues. We then met with most of the Deans of the Divisions and provided a period of comment for those Deans who could not attend the meeting. Toward the end of July we met with representatives from the Graduate Council to receive their comments and concerns. All of these meetings proved to be informative and insightful.
As noted above, the Provost has decided to accept and implement all the increases to graduate student teaching remuneration recommended in the report. These increases will take effect Autumn Quarter 2008. The total cost of these increases in remuneration for the 2008-09 academic year is $2.8 million. Maintaining remuneration at these increased levels will require similarly sized expenditures in future years which the Provost’s office will fund.
In the report, the committee makes specific recommendations for increasing the remuneration graduate student teachers receive across a number of designated positions. The recommended increases apply only to those making less than the recommended amount. Positions paid more than the recommended amount will remain unchanged.
Listed below is a summary of the accepted recommendations.
· Increase the remuneration for lecturers from $3500 to $5000
· Increase the remuneration for course and teaching assistants from $1500 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for laboratory and lecture teaching assistants in the Biological Sciences Collegiate Division from a range of $650-$2750 to a range of $709-$3000
· Increase the remuneration for writing interns from $1900/$2000 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for core interns from $1500 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for writing program lectors for undergraduate courses from $1400/$1500 to $2500
· Increase the remuneration for writing program lectors for graduate courses from $2000 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for preceptors from the range of $2500-$6500 to $7500 over three quarters
· Increase the remuneration for lectors in language departments from $1500 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for drill instructors from $800 to $1500
· Increase the remuneration for studio assistants from $1000 to $1500
We urge each of you to read the entire report which is posted on the Office of the Provost website to gain a better understanding of the changes in remuneration recommended and accepted.
In addition to the increase in remuneration, we are adopting the recommendation of the committee to reduce stipends for teaching commitments in the 2008-09 academic year by the previous, lower remuneration levels for all teaching positions. Specifically, those students in the Social Sciences and Humanities Divisions whose stipends are scheduled to be reduced for required teaching expectations will have their stipends reduced only by the previous remuneration levels instead of the newly increased remuneration levels. Thus, students who were scheduled to have their stipends reduced by the amount they will receive for serving as a teaching assistant in one course as part of their teaching requirement will have their stipends reduced by $1500 instead of the new rate of $3000. This delay of one year in adjusting stipend reductions to reflect the new rates of remuneration will allow students time to plan for increases in their stipend reductions in accordance with their teaching requirements. We will begin to reduce stipends at the new levels of remuneration beginning in the 2009-10 academic year. We refer you to the report and your Dean of Students for greater clarification on how stipend reductions will affect students in each division.
We will continue to monitor annually the remuneration provided graduate students, with the goal of remaining competitive with our peers. We do not want to increase remuneration this year only to find ourselves in the same situation five years from now. As always, budgetary decisions must be made in the general context of the many demands on resources across the University.
As noted in the report, the issue of competition and comparisons to peer institutions is a complicated one. There will be those who point to other schools that seem to pay their students more to teach. On this issue we have two thoughts.
First is the recognition that a number of schools use a different system for calculating remuneration than what most of our divisions currently use. Some of our peers use a system of teaching fellowships in place of the general stipend support we currently provide. Students awarded a teaching fellowship are often expected to teach during the designated years of support. In such a system, if a student receives a teaching fellowship of $20,000 for the year and is required to teach three courses, the school might list the remuneration for graduate student teaching as $6,666 with the understanding that pay for one course is equal to one-third of the teaching stipend. We currently do not use teaching fellowships, so it may appear that our remuneration for required graduate student teaching is less than another school although our students are receiving the same amount of yearly support—often with a smaller teaching requirement. The use of teaching fellowships by other schools is not the reason we have trailed our peers in what we pay graduate students for their services in the classroom. In the past we neglected to pay attention to this important area of compensation. The use of teaching fellowships by other schools, however, makes comparisons of graduate student remuneration across schools more difficult.
Second, a number of schools have been able to increase the remuneration of graduate student teaching by limiting which students are eligible to teach. Specifically, at some peer institutions, students are only eligible to teach while receiving stipend support or holding a teaching fellowship—often during the first five to six years of graduate study. We do not impose such restrictions on graduate student teaching. The University has benefited from the expertise advanced graduate students often bring to the classroom. That said, we want to state emphatically that these increases in remuneration should not be seen as endorsing or facilitating an increase in the number of graduate student lecturers. We strongly encourage all divisions to work with their departments and programs to devise systems so that advanced graduate students have to rely less on teaching for needed support and can instead devote more of their time to completing their dissertations. These issues of teaching among advanced graduate students and time limits or caps on teaching will be addressed by the Provost’s Committee on Advanced Residence and Time to Degree.
We also want to underscore our belief, echoed by the committee in its report, that graduate student teaching is just one dimension—although a critically important one—of graduate education more generally. Classroom experience is an opportunity for graduate students to hone their communication, listening, and evaluation skills. In the classroom, through the guidance of a professor, graduate student teachers learn how to present material, listen to and address contradictory arguments, and evaluate and constructively engage the written and verbal work of others. We believe that teaching is an experience that benefits all graduate students whether their careers will be strictly academic or they choose some other arena through which to make a contribution. We hope that departments and programs across the University will take the announcement of these increases in remuneration to discuss among their faculty and students the purpose of teaching and how the teaching experience of graduate students can continue to be improved.
Increasing the remuneration provided graduate student teachers is part of our continued commitment to enhance graduate education at the University of Chicago. Over the past three years we have made significant investments in numerous areas to ensure that our graduate students have the resources and support they need to be successful in their endeavors. Through the Graduate Aid Initiative (GAI), we have significantly changed our funding packages, providing five years of full funding and health insurance and two summers of additional support to nearly every student matriculating to the University since Autumn 2007. We are expanding the GAI to include newly matriculating students in the Divinity School. For those students not covered under the GAI, we have worked with departments and divisions to increase the minimum stipends of many underfunded students.
The University now guarantees that every graduate student who matriculated since 2003 will have health insurance through the balance of their first five years of graduate school. We increased the number of Provost Summer Fellowships awarded this summer from 25 to 100. Provost Summer Fellowships will again be available next year. We will award 50 fellowships in the summer of 2009, up from the 15 originally budgeted. We have funded a new set of dissertation fellowships that will be available for at least five years, the first fellowships having been awarded earlier this year. The administration has secured an endowment of $6 million from the Mellon Foundation explicitly for the funding of graduate education. In the first five years of the endowment the award will be used to fund dissertation fellowships. More recently we suspended the annual increase of 5 percent in Advanced Residence tuition. We also have created a policy to ensure that graduate students who are new parents have greater flexibility in meeting their requirements.
Although we have made substantial progress in reinforcing the core aspects of our graduate programs, we will continue to review our policies and support. For example, the work of the Teaching Committee will continue through the Autumn and Winter Quarters. The Provost’s Committee on Advanced Residence and Time to Degree will intensify its work over the next year; the Vice President and Dean of Students, Kim Goff-Crews, will move forward with her committee to explore issues that confront international students; and the Council on Teaching will devote some of its time in the upcoming year to examining the training provided graduate student teachers.
One very important goal of our work concerning graduate education has been to strengthen the lines of communication between graduate students and the administration. Leading our efforts in this area is Professor Cathy Cohen, Deputy Provost for Graduate Education, whose responsibilities include not only providing better coordination across units responsible for graduate education and making the necessary changes to enhance the educational experience we provide graduate students, but also making sure that the concerns and opinions of graduate students are seriously considered when we decide our priorities and our commitment of resources. Toward this end, all of the recent committees examining issues that directly affect graduate students have included graduate student representation. As we did in this instance, both the Provost and the Deputy Provost have met with representatives from the Graduate Council to seek their input on the recommendations forwarded from University committees. We also have made ourselves available to discuss recommendations and decisions with a wider group of graduate students through forums and other meetings.
To extend this type of exchange between graduate students and the administration, this fall the Deputy Provost will begin a series of meetings with the graduate students in each department, program, and school. These meetings will be opportunities to hear the concerns of graduate students and also to discuss the efforts of the administration and how best to improve graduate education generally across the University. She also will continue to make regular presentations to the Graduate Council and will for the first time meet quarterly with the Directors of Graduate Studies across the University. We believe that graduate students are an important part of the University community who hold a unique perspective on the education delivered to both graduate students and students in the College. We want to hear from and work with graduate students. None of this is meant to supersede the essential communication and work that happens within the divisions, departments, programs, and schools, which hold the most important responsibilities in planning, improving, and protecting the exceptional education we offer graduate students.
We thank the committee for its hard work and look forward to its final report, which we expect to receive toward the end of the Winter Quarter 2009. Enjoy the rest of your summer and we look forward to seeing you in September.
For more: http://provost.uchicago.edu/pdfs/student_remuneration.pdf
From: Cathy J. Cohen, Deputy Provost for Graduate Education
Thomas F. Rosenbaum, Provost
Date: August 25, 2008
Re: Increase in Remuneration for Graduate Student Teachers
We are writing to update you on the work and recommendations of the Provost’s Committee on Graduate Student Teaching. We are pleased to announce that we plan to accept the recommendations of the committee, as detailed below. This will result in a significant increase in the remuneration for graduate student teachers, effective during the Autumn Quarter beginning in September.
In February 2008, the Provost, the Deputy Provost for Graduate Education, and the Vice President and Dean of Students established a set of action steps to address some of the key issues raised by graduate students during the previous year. One action was to have the Deputy Provost establish a committee of faculty, graduate students, and administrators to explore issues related to graduate student teaching. The Provost’s Committee was asked initially to focus on issues of remuneration for graduate student teachers, issuing an interim report at the end of Spring Quarter 2008. The Committee would then return to work Autumn Quarter 2008, addressing issues of pedagogical training, delineating graduate student teacher’s responsibilities, reviewing job classifications and the possible need for newly defined positions, and designing a plan to monitor the experience of graduate student teachers in the classroom.
The Committee submitted its interim report to the Provost at the end of June with a set of recommendations regarding remuneration of graduate student teachers. The report can be found in the news section of the Office of the Provost Web site (http://provost.uchicago.edu/). A series of meetings followed to obtain wide feedback on the report. We first met with members of the Committee in early July to discuss their findings and address any outstanding issues. We then met with most of the Deans of the Divisions and provided a period of comment for those Deans who could not attend the meeting. Toward the end of July we met with representatives from the Graduate Council to receive their comments and concerns. All of these meetings proved to be informative and insightful.
As noted above, the Provost has decided to accept and implement all the increases to graduate student teaching remuneration recommended in the report. These increases will take effect Autumn Quarter 2008. The total cost of these increases in remuneration for the 2008-09 academic year is $2.8 million. Maintaining remuneration at these increased levels will require similarly sized expenditures in future years which the Provost’s office will fund.
In the report, the committee makes specific recommendations for increasing the remuneration graduate student teachers receive across a number of designated positions. The recommended increases apply only to those making less than the recommended amount. Positions paid more than the recommended amount will remain unchanged.
Listed below is a summary of the accepted recommendations.
· Increase the remuneration for lecturers from $3500 to $5000
· Increase the remuneration for course and teaching assistants from $1500 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for laboratory and lecture teaching assistants in the Biological Sciences Collegiate Division from a range of $650-$2750 to a range of $709-$3000
· Increase the remuneration for writing interns from $1900/$2000 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for core interns from $1500 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for writing program lectors for undergraduate courses from $1400/$1500 to $2500
· Increase the remuneration for writing program lectors for graduate courses from $2000 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for preceptors from the range of $2500-$6500 to $7500 over three quarters
· Increase the remuneration for lectors in language departments from $1500 to $3000
· Increase the remuneration for drill instructors from $800 to $1500
· Increase the remuneration for studio assistants from $1000 to $1500
We urge each of you to read the entire report which is posted on the Office of the Provost website to gain a better understanding of the changes in remuneration recommended and accepted.
In addition to the increase in remuneration, we are adopting the recommendation of the committee to reduce stipends for teaching commitments in the 2008-09 academic year by the previous, lower remuneration levels for all teaching positions. Specifically, those students in the Social Sciences and Humanities Divisions whose stipends are scheduled to be reduced for required teaching expectations will have their stipends reduced only by the previous remuneration levels instead of the newly increased remuneration levels. Thus, students who were scheduled to have their stipends reduced by the amount they will receive for serving as a teaching assistant in one course as part of their teaching requirement will have their stipends reduced by $1500 instead of the new rate of $3000. This delay of one year in adjusting stipend reductions to reflect the new rates of remuneration will allow students time to plan for increases in their stipend reductions in accordance with their teaching requirements. We will begin to reduce stipends at the new levels of remuneration beginning in the 2009-10 academic year. We refer you to the report and your Dean of Students for greater clarification on how stipend reductions will affect students in each division.
We will continue to monitor annually the remuneration provided graduate students, with the goal of remaining competitive with our peers. We do not want to increase remuneration this year only to find ourselves in the same situation five years from now. As always, budgetary decisions must be made in the general context of the many demands on resources across the University.
As noted in the report, the issue of competition and comparisons to peer institutions is a complicated one. There will be those who point to other schools that seem to pay their students more to teach. On this issue we have two thoughts.
First is the recognition that a number of schools use a different system for calculating remuneration than what most of our divisions currently use. Some of our peers use a system of teaching fellowships in place of the general stipend support we currently provide. Students awarded a teaching fellowship are often expected to teach during the designated years of support. In such a system, if a student receives a teaching fellowship of $20,000 for the year and is required to teach three courses, the school might list the remuneration for graduate student teaching as $6,666 with the understanding that pay for one course is equal to one-third of the teaching stipend. We currently do not use teaching fellowships, so it may appear that our remuneration for required graduate student teaching is less than another school although our students are receiving the same amount of yearly support—often with a smaller teaching requirement. The use of teaching fellowships by other schools is not the reason we have trailed our peers in what we pay graduate students for their services in the classroom. In the past we neglected to pay attention to this important area of compensation. The use of teaching fellowships by other schools, however, makes comparisons of graduate student remuneration across schools more difficult.
Second, a number of schools have been able to increase the remuneration of graduate student teaching by limiting which students are eligible to teach. Specifically, at some peer institutions, students are only eligible to teach while receiving stipend support or holding a teaching fellowship—often during the first five to six years of graduate study. We do not impose such restrictions on graduate student teaching. The University has benefited from the expertise advanced graduate students often bring to the classroom. That said, we want to state emphatically that these increases in remuneration should not be seen as endorsing or facilitating an increase in the number of graduate student lecturers. We strongly encourage all divisions to work with their departments and programs to devise systems so that advanced graduate students have to rely less on teaching for needed support and can instead devote more of their time to completing their dissertations. These issues of teaching among advanced graduate students and time limits or caps on teaching will be addressed by the Provost’s Committee on Advanced Residence and Time to Degree.
We also want to underscore our belief, echoed by the committee in its report, that graduate student teaching is just one dimension—although a critically important one—of graduate education more generally. Classroom experience is an opportunity for graduate students to hone their communication, listening, and evaluation skills. In the classroom, through the guidance of a professor, graduate student teachers learn how to present material, listen to and address contradictory arguments, and evaluate and constructively engage the written and verbal work of others. We believe that teaching is an experience that benefits all graduate students whether their careers will be strictly academic or they choose some other arena through which to make a contribution. We hope that departments and programs across the University will take the announcement of these increases in remuneration to discuss among their faculty and students the purpose of teaching and how the teaching experience of graduate students can continue to be improved.
Increasing the remuneration provided graduate student teachers is part of our continued commitment to enhance graduate education at the University of Chicago. Over the past three years we have made significant investments in numerous areas to ensure that our graduate students have the resources and support they need to be successful in their endeavors. Through the Graduate Aid Initiative (GAI), we have significantly changed our funding packages, providing five years of full funding and health insurance and two summers of additional support to nearly every student matriculating to the University since Autumn 2007. We are expanding the GAI to include newly matriculating students in the Divinity School. For those students not covered under the GAI, we have worked with departments and divisions to increase the minimum stipends of many underfunded students.
The University now guarantees that every graduate student who matriculated since 2003 will have health insurance through the balance of their first five years of graduate school. We increased the number of Provost Summer Fellowships awarded this summer from 25 to 100. Provost Summer Fellowships will again be available next year. We will award 50 fellowships in the summer of 2009, up from the 15 originally budgeted. We have funded a new set of dissertation fellowships that will be available for at least five years, the first fellowships having been awarded earlier this year. The administration has secured an endowment of $6 million from the Mellon Foundation explicitly for the funding of graduate education. In the first five years of the endowment the award will be used to fund dissertation fellowships. More recently we suspended the annual increase of 5 percent in Advanced Residence tuition. We also have created a policy to ensure that graduate students who are new parents have greater flexibility in meeting their requirements.
Although we have made substantial progress in reinforcing the core aspects of our graduate programs, we will continue to review our policies and support. For example, the work of the Teaching Committee will continue through the Autumn and Winter Quarters. The Provost’s Committee on Advanced Residence and Time to Degree will intensify its work over the next year; the Vice President and Dean of Students, Kim Goff-Crews, will move forward with her committee to explore issues that confront international students; and the Council on Teaching will devote some of its time in the upcoming year to examining the training provided graduate student teachers.
One very important goal of our work concerning graduate education has been to strengthen the lines of communication between graduate students and the administration. Leading our efforts in this area is Professor Cathy Cohen, Deputy Provost for Graduate Education, whose responsibilities include not only providing better coordination across units responsible for graduate education and making the necessary changes to enhance the educational experience we provide graduate students, but also making sure that the concerns and opinions of graduate students are seriously considered when we decide our priorities and our commitment of resources. Toward this end, all of the recent committees examining issues that directly affect graduate students have included graduate student representation. As we did in this instance, both the Provost and the Deputy Provost have met with representatives from the Graduate Council to seek their input on the recommendations forwarded from University committees. We also have made ourselves available to discuss recommendations and decisions with a wider group of graduate students through forums and other meetings.
To extend this type of exchange between graduate students and the administration, this fall the Deputy Provost will begin a series of meetings with the graduate students in each department, program, and school. These meetings will be opportunities to hear the concerns of graduate students and also to discuss the efforts of the administration and how best to improve graduate education generally across the University. She also will continue to make regular presentations to the Graduate Council and will for the first time meet quarterly with the Directors of Graduate Studies across the University. We believe that graduate students are an important part of the University community who hold a unique perspective on the education delivered to both graduate students and students in the College. We want to hear from and work with graduate students. None of this is meant to supersede the essential communication and work that happens within the divisions, departments, programs, and schools, which hold the most important responsibilities in planning, improving, and protecting the exceptional education we offer graduate students.
We thank the committee for its hard work and look forward to its final report, which we expect to receive toward the end of the Winter Quarter 2009. Enjoy the rest of your summer and we look forward to seeing you in September.
For more: http://provost.uchicago.edu/pdfs/student_remuneration.pdf
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Maroon Op-Ed: Strength in Number by Megan Wade
A recent article in the Chicago Reader sums up well the problem facing graduate students across the country: It is “the university as corporation, [the model in which] some university heads are calling themselves CEOs, graduate students are more than ever an exploitable source of cheap labor, and most Ph.D.s are doomed to a lifetime of multiple, low-paying, part-time jobs.”
While some universities move to amend the situation, the University of Chicago administration, once again, follows rather than leads. Provost Thomas Rosenbaum’s recommendations on graduate funding in February, while providing some additional funding opportunities, failed to address key financial issues for students—instead treating them as if they were employees of the University. (Though where that line rests is unclear. At an open forum in March, Rosenbaum consistently described departments as “hiring” rather than “admitting” graduate students into their Ph.D. programs.) Issues of increased pay for all teaching and T.A. positions, as well as the provision of appropriate benefits like health care for student employees, remained unresolved.
Click here for more:
http://www.chicagomaroon.com/online_edition/article/10487
While some universities move to amend the situation, the University of Chicago administration, once again, follows rather than leads. Provost Thomas Rosenbaum’s recommendations on graduate funding in February, while providing some additional funding opportunities, failed to address key financial issues for students—instead treating them as if they were employees of the University. (Though where that line rests is unclear. At an open forum in March, Rosenbaum consistently described departments as “hiring” rather than “admitting” graduate students into their Ph.D. programs.) Issues of increased pay for all teaching and T.A. positions, as well as the provision of appropriate benefits like health care for student employees, remained unresolved.
Click here for more:
http://www.chicagomaroon.com/online_edition/article/10487
Memo from Board of Trustees Student and Campus Life Committee
The University of Chicago Board of Trustees
Student and Campus Life Committee
Memorandum
To:
Hollie Gilman, Undergraduate Student Liaison
John Mark Hansen, Dean, Social Sciences Division
Rick Rosengarten, Dean, Divinity School
Erica Simmons, Graduate Student Liaison
From: Klingensmith, Chair, Student and Campus Life Committee
Subject: Recent Meeting on Graduate Student Funding Issues
I am writing on behalf of the committee to thank each of you for participating in the May 5, 2008, meeting to discuss graduate student issues, particularly the University's financial support of current and future graduate students. Strengthening our graduate programs has been identified by the administration as a strategic priority, and the Board recognizes and appreciates its importance. The Student and Campus Life Committee has the particular responsibility to understand the situation of the current and future student body so that it may advise the whole Board on strategic matters connected to student and campus life that support the institution's overall mission.
Although specific academic and administrative decisions remain the province of teh faculty and administration, it was very useful for the Committee to hear from your different perspectives more about the context and complexity of the issues having an impact upon graduate education at the university. We recognize and are sympathetic to the concerns expressed to us by current graduate students and wish that the University must manage carefully all of the many worthwhile demands on its resources and make decisions in the best interests of the University as a whole.
We wish to thank in particular, Erica Simmons, Graduate Liaison, for raising many of the issues we discussed thoroughly through her term. We have been impressed with the work of the students who have supported her efforts and brought forth information and arguments that enabled all of us to think more broadly about these issues.
To be sure our discussion reinforced the importance of enhancing the graduate student experience in all of its components. We appreciate all the work that has been done to date and the Committee looks forward to being kept appraised by the administration of the work of Cathy Cohen and Kim Goff-Crews, including their review of teaching stipends and advanced residency tuition.
c: Members of the Student and Campus Life Committee
James Crown, Chair, Board of Trustees
Robert Zimmer, President
Thomas Rosenbaum, Provost
David Fithian, Secretary of the University
Kimberly Goff-crews, Vice President and Dean of Students
Martha Roth, Dean, Humanities Division
Cathy Cohen, Deputy Provost
Student and Campus Life Committee
Memorandum
To:
Hollie Gilman, Undergraduate Student Liaison
John Mark Hansen, Dean, Social Sciences Division
Rick Rosengarten, Dean, Divinity School
Erica Simmons, Graduate Student Liaison
From: Klingensmith, Chair, Student and Campus Life Committee
Subject: Recent Meeting on Graduate Student Funding Issues
I am writing on behalf of the committee to thank each of you for participating in the May 5, 2008, meeting to discuss graduate student issues, particularly the University's financial support of current and future graduate students. Strengthening our graduate programs has been identified by the administration as a strategic priority, and the Board recognizes and appreciates its importance. The Student and Campus Life Committee has the particular responsibility to understand the situation of the current and future student body so that it may advise the whole Board on strategic matters connected to student and campus life that support the institution's overall mission.
Although specific academic and administrative decisions remain the province of teh faculty and administration, it was very useful for the Committee to hear from your different perspectives more about the context and complexity of the issues having an impact upon graduate education at the university. We recognize and are sympathetic to the concerns expressed to us by current graduate students and wish that the University must manage carefully all of the many worthwhile demands on its resources and make decisions in the best interests of the University as a whole.
We wish to thank in particular, Erica Simmons, Graduate Liaison, for raising many of the issues we discussed thoroughly through her term. We have been impressed with the work of the students who have supported her efforts and brought forth information and arguments that enabled all of us to think more broadly about these issues.
To be sure our discussion reinforced the importance of enhancing the graduate student experience in all of its components. We appreciate all the work that has been done to date and the Committee looks forward to being kept appraised by the administration of the work of Cathy Cohen and Kim Goff-Crews, including their review of teaching stipends and advanced residency tuition.
c: Members of the Student and Campus Life Committee
James Crown, Chair, Board of Trustees
Robert Zimmer, President
Thomas Rosenbaum, Provost
David Fithian, Secretary of the University
Kimberly Goff-crews, Vice President and Dean of Students
Martha Roth, Dean, Humanities Division
Cathy Cohen, Deputy Provost
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Analysis of Teach Out(side)
The Teaching Out concluded on May 29th with roughly 1,500 undergrads, grads, and faculty participating. All this means that that with no budget, with poorly populated contact databases, only 10 days of preparation, and an informal agreement between the Graduate Funding Committee and Graduate Students United (GSU), we were able to motivate some 1500 or so people to recognize this cause and participate in an action. Since the Apple action several months ago, these numbers have constantly increased, and it seems now, exponentially. Since we began organizing this event, we have improved our contacts with students and GSU is building a membership base of student interested in improving the plight of student employees on campus.
The recent Maroon editorial aside, in the year or so since the GAI was announced, the efforts of GFC and GSU have been, at the very least, successful in bringing attention to issues that have been sorely overlooked for too long and, more realistically, have stirred a bureaucracy, notoriously lethargic in its efforts to recognize grad student quality of life issues, into making some movement.
While speaking with a member of the Graduate Funding Committee yesterday, it was brought to my attention that none of the committees focusing on advanced residency fees, health care, or international students plan on dropping any real suggestions until well into the next academic year. For those of us who will be back on campus in September, it would appear that we have to start thinking about these over a long period of time. And in regards to next year, we have the added advantage of a very receptive Student Government and the Liaisons to the Board in key positions to help build networks and voice our concerns far more directly to the administration than in the past.
Moreover, this administration is the first in recent memory that has had to contend with a determined, organized, responsive, and angry grad student body, coalescing – slower than we may have wished – into a formidable opponent. And whether or not one sees correlation or causation in such a situation, there is one thing we all know for sure: while this may be the best any administration has offered to grad students in years, they are still going to have to do a hell of a lot better if they don’t want to see 2000, 3000, 5000, or more students protesting on the quad next year.
If you have any thoughts, comments, or concerns, feel free to post them below.
The recent Maroon editorial aside, in the year or so since the GAI was announced, the efforts of GFC and GSU have been, at the very least, successful in bringing attention to issues that have been sorely overlooked for too long and, more realistically, have stirred a bureaucracy, notoriously lethargic in its efforts to recognize grad student quality of life issues, into making some movement.
While speaking with a member of the Graduate Funding Committee yesterday, it was brought to my attention that none of the committees focusing on advanced residency fees, health care, or international students plan on dropping any real suggestions until well into the next academic year. For those of us who will be back on campus in September, it would appear that we have to start thinking about these over a long period of time. And in regards to next year, we have the added advantage of a very receptive Student Government and the Liaisons to the Board in key positions to help build networks and voice our concerns far more directly to the administration than in the past.
Moreover, this administration is the first in recent memory that has had to contend with a determined, organized, responsive, and angry grad student body, coalescing – slower than we may have wished – into a formidable opponent. And whether or not one sees correlation or causation in such a situation, there is one thing we all know for sure: while this may be the best any administration has offered to grad students in years, they are still going to have to do a hell of a lot better if they don’t want to see 2000, 3000, 5000, or more students protesting on the quad next year.
If you have any thoughts, comments, or concerns, feel free to post them below.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Pictures from Teach Out(side): May 28th and 29th
Summary of Teach Out(side):
# of classes taught out on the quads:
Wed: 20-25
Thurs: 65
Total: 85-90 classes (impressive!)
Best class period: Thursday morning 10:30 – Noon @ 23 classes out at the same time
- from noon – 1:30 we had at least 17 classes outside
- it should be noted that at this point it was sunny and warm.
- Rain started around 1:15 and continued for about half an hour into the 1:30 – 3pm class period, so very few classes came out; but we still had 4 groups, sitting on fieldstone, huddling in archways and otherwise going on and beyond the call of duty.
- If it had not rained, we would have topped 100 classes over the two days.
A fairly conservative average class size would be 15 (many groups were 20+, some 30+ and of course there were smaller discussion groups, but I think 15 is fair and even 20 wouldn’t be stretching it).
So, if we use the most conservative estimates, 85 classes times 15 students per, we had 1275 grads, undergrads and faculty out there over two days. At the high end (90 classes * 20 students per) we had 1800 folks on the Quad.
Wednesday, May 28th 2008
Thursday, May 29th, 2008
# of classes taught out on the quads:
Wed: 20-25
Thurs: 65
Total: 85-90 classes (impressive!)
Best class period: Thursday morning 10:30 – Noon @ 23 classes out at the same time
- from noon – 1:30 we had at least 17 classes outside
- it should be noted that at this point it was sunny and warm.
- Rain started around 1:15 and continued for about half an hour into the 1:30 – 3pm class period, so very few classes came out; but we still had 4 groups, sitting on fieldstone, huddling in archways and otherwise going on and beyond the call of duty.
- If it had not rained, we would have topped 100 classes over the two days.
A fairly conservative average class size would be 15 (many groups were 20+, some 30+ and of course there were smaller discussion groups, but I think 15 is fair and even 20 wouldn’t be stretching it).
So, if we use the most conservative estimates, 85 classes times 15 students per, we had 1275 grads, undergrads and faculty out there over two days. At the high end (90 classes * 20 students per) we had 1800 folks on the Quad.
Wednesday, May 28th 2008
Thursday, May 29th, 2008
Saturday, May 24, 2008
TEACH OUT (side)
Wednesday May 28 & Thursday May 29
On the Quad
Attention University of Chicago Students, Staff, and Faculty
On Wednesday May 28th and Thursday May 29th, we call upon you
to hold your classes outside to show solidarity with graduate
student employees and their demands for fair pay, guaranteed
teaching opportunities, and health care benefits.
For over a year, we have been calling attention to the
shockingly low wages paid to graduate students teachers. Our
pay has not increased in over eight years. Whether we grade
papers as Teaching Assistants ($1,500 per quarter) or instruct
a course ($3,500 per quarter), our pay remains the lowest
among peer institutions and most area universities, and far
below the cost of living. Furthermore, none of the teaching
positions we hold include health care insurance or other
employee benefits,
The work we do is essential to the functioning of this
university, but we are paid as if we are disposable.
In response, Graduate Students United and the Graduate
Council's Graduate Funding Committee have been collecting
petitions, holding rallies, and organizing students to fight
for a change. While we have won some improvements in graduate
stipends, summer funding, and dissertation fellowships, these
limited changes have not met the needs of current students.
And it was only at the start of the Spring Quarter that we
were successful in getting the Provost's Office to convene a
student-faculty Committee on Teaching to review these and
other employment issues.
While this committee will likely recommend a much-needed raise
in teaching pay, these recommendations must be approved by
many of the same administrators who have failed year after
year to increase pay!
To help support the work of the Teaching Committee, Graduate
Students United and the Graduate Funding Committee is calling
for a two-day Teach Out so that the university can see how
much teaching we do as well as how much support we have from
students, staff, and faculty.
Who: All Students, Staff, and Professors
Where: Outside on the Main Quad
What: A Two-Day Teach Out in Solidarity with Graduate Students
When: Wednesday May 28th and Thursday May 29th
Why: Graduate students demand fair pay and health care
coverage for all university employees!
For more info or a PDF copy of the event flyer, contact:
Joe Bonni: joebonni@uchicago.edu
Toussaint Losier: tlosier@uchicago.edu
Sponsored by:
the Graduate Funding Committee
Graduate Students United
On the Quad
Attention University of Chicago Students, Staff, and Faculty
On Wednesday May 28th and Thursday May 29th, we call upon you
to hold your classes outside to show solidarity with graduate
student employees and their demands for fair pay, guaranteed
teaching opportunities, and health care benefits.
For over a year, we have been calling attention to the
shockingly low wages paid to graduate students teachers. Our
pay has not increased in over eight years. Whether we grade
papers as Teaching Assistants ($1,500 per quarter) or instruct
a course ($3,500 per quarter), our pay remains the lowest
among peer institutions and most area universities, and far
below the cost of living. Furthermore, none of the teaching
positions we hold include health care insurance or other
employee benefits,
The work we do is essential to the functioning of this
university, but we are paid as if we are disposable.
In response, Graduate Students United and the Graduate
Council's Graduate Funding Committee have been collecting
petitions, holding rallies, and organizing students to fight
for a change. While we have won some improvements in graduate
stipends, summer funding, and dissertation fellowships, these
limited changes have not met the needs of current students.
And it was only at the start of the Spring Quarter that we
were successful in getting the Provost's Office to convene a
student-faculty Committee on Teaching to review these and
other employment issues.
While this committee will likely recommend a much-needed raise
in teaching pay, these recommendations must be approved by
many of the same administrators who have failed year after
year to increase pay!
To help support the work of the Teaching Committee, Graduate
Students United and the Graduate Funding Committee is calling
for a two-day Teach Out so that the university can see how
much teaching we do as well as how much support we have from
students, staff, and faculty.
Who: All Students, Staff, and Professors
Where: Outside on the Main Quad
What: A Two-Day Teach Out in Solidarity with Graduate Students
When: Wednesday May 28th and Thursday May 29th
Why: Graduate students demand fair pay and health care
coverage for all university employees!
For more info or a PDF copy of the event flyer, contact:
Joe Bonni: joebonni@uchicago.edu
Toussaint Losier: tlosier@uchicago.edu
Sponsored by:
the Graduate Funding Committee
Graduate Students United
Chicago Maroon: Grad Group Seeks Better Benefits
The formation this school year of Graduate Students United (GSU), a group of graduate students seeking to improve graduate employee benefits at the University, has added yet another voice to the chorus of calls for better representation and funding at the University.
GSU was organized in September to present a unified group to advocate for graduate student worker issues.
“The main goal was to build the power of working graduate students,” GSU member Jack Lesniewski said. “Not to be relying on ad-hoc committees or on particular administration at particular points but to have a sustained power and presence that democratically represents the interests of working graduate students.”
Click here for more:
http://www.chicagomaroon.com/online_edition/article/9846
GSU was organized in September to present a unified group to advocate for graduate student worker issues.
“The main goal was to build the power of working graduate students,” GSU member Jack Lesniewski said. “Not to be relying on ad-hoc committees or on particular administration at particular points but to have a sustained power and presence that democratically represents the interests of working graduate students.”
Click here for more:
http://www.chicagomaroon.com/online_edition/article/9846
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Article in the University of Chicago Magazine
“First we took our classes / Then we wrote up our MAs,” sang Joe Grim Feinberg, AM’06, a fifth-year anthropology graduate student and Graduate Students United (GSU) member, at a March 12 rally outside Swift Hall. “Then we took exams / And we proposed to dissertate. / Then we did our research in the field so far away. / Then we looked into our pockets / And we found we had no pay.”
Click to read more:
http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0856/chicago_journal/graduated_aid.shtml
Click to read more:
http://magazine.uchicago.edu/0856/chicago_journal/graduated_aid.shtml
Friday, May 16, 2008
Chronicle of Higher Ed:Grad Student Union Launched at U. of Chicago
In 2004, the Bush mob’s infamous executive arrogance in the Brown decision jammed the brakes on the organizing of graduate student employees at private universities (previously green-lighted by a bipartisan unanimous NLRB decision consistent with the law governing grad employees at public institutions, affirming the victory of GSOC-UAW at NYU).
Despite the setback, organizing is once more on the front burner at private universities in the U.S., including by committed, activist grad employees at the University of Chicago, outraged by an unfair stipend arrangement and by some of the lowest wages for teaching in the country (as low as $1,500 per quarter). As a result of graduate employee agitation, commonly through collective bargaining, 3/4 of university employers pay for graduate employee health insurance; the University of Chicago does not. Among the graduate employees that I met there last month was one whose earnings as a gardener offered far better pay than his teaching.
Click for more:
http://chronicle.com/review/brainstorm/bousquet/grad-student-union-launched-at-u-chicago
Despite the setback, organizing is once more on the front burner at private universities in the U.S., including by committed, activist grad employees at the University of Chicago, outraged by an unfair stipend arrangement and by some of the lowest wages for teaching in the country (as low as $1,500 per quarter). As a result of graduate employee agitation, commonly through collective bargaining, 3/4 of university employers pay for graduate employee health insurance; the University of Chicago does not. Among the graduate employees that I met there last month was one whose earnings as a gardener offered far better pay than his teaching.
Click for more:
http://chronicle.com/review/brainstorm/bousquet/grad-student-union-launched-at-u-chicago
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)