The below, incredibly long email is the result of 3 things.
- The concerns sent to us from some students via email. These were presented to graduate student director Matt Hunt on Sept. 28 in his open meeting with graduate students.
- These are the responses that Matt Hunt gave us during the Sept. 28 meeting.
- These are the responses given by faculty members during the Oct. 4 COGS meeting (Committee on Graduate Studies).
Each concern and their respective responses are below, one by one.
1. Students are concerned that faculty are taking little to no time to help them, reach out, or even learn their names, much less make themselves available to act as mentors. While many students are comfortable being proactive in this respect, some are not, and are being unfairly overlooked. Faculty should encouraged to make more of an effort. On a related note, students concede that some professors probably participate with graduate students at a much higher rate than others. This extra effort on the part of a few does not excuse the refusal of others to participate (actual refusals have occurred).
Matt Hunt meeting = students should be proactive; “the squeaky wheel gets the grease”; on the other hand, it’s not appropriate for faculty to outright refuse someone; faculty are busy, and although a few participate with students on a very high level, others don’t work with students much, and can’t really be forced to; he’s discussed this with colleagues, who are not willing to make an extra effort without incentives; he suggested the graduate students come up with some kind of reward/award.Students present seemed to like this idea, but also realized that a simple “Best Faculty Member” award would not be meaningful to those faculty members who were already not already working with students. One student said, “If professors aren’t willing to work with us, why should we work for them?”
COGS meeting = reps noted that those who are willing to participate heavily with graduate students already are, and we don’t want to unfairly (additionally) burden them by asking more of them. Ultimately, every faculty member needs to participate. Some faculty members agreed that it is the duty of graduate students to reach out and network on their own (”part of graduate student socialization”). Other faculty members seemed to appreciate that it is difficult for some students to do this.
2. A good deal of time and energy has been spent talking about the process of finding out whether or not you’re being funded the next year. This is true across NUTA’s, TA’s, RA’s,. and SGA’s. There is an understanding that budgets are budgets, and to some extent the dept. has no control. However, students seem to be most upset that they don’t know what steps occur between the budget decisions being made and a funding letter being sent or not being sent.
Matt Hunt meeting = Budgets are budgets. Steps between budgets decisions and funding letters were not discussed. Dr. Hunt seemed to be surprised to find out that students are never officially informed that they will not be funded in the future. One student confirmed that this has been the system for at least the last 5 years. This same student suggested that a ranking of graduate students be posted so that students will know ahead of time how likely it is that they will get funding. This was suggested because some students get the feeling that decisions are made privately and purposefully in favor of favorite students. Rankings would at least remove some of the mystery from the funding situation. Some students objected to this idea because it would increase competition among students, to the detriment of students’ friendships with each other.
An agreement was made that a global email will be sent out notifying students that funding decisions are completed. There was also talk of sending out an email listing everyone who had been awarded funding for the next year. No decision was made about this.
COGS meeting = it was stressed by a staff member that graduate students are NOT guaranteed funding from year to year, no matter what they think or have been told (erroneously). Funding decisions are made annually after budget decisions are handed down from higher offices. The department usually receives their budget in February or March for the following year. Even so, faculty agreed that the current system of informing or not informing students of funding decisions is not acceptable. One faculty member lamented the spotty quality of university email. All agreed that funding letters (and other very important information) will be placed in graduate student mailboxes. So start checking your mailboxes!
3. On a related note, there is deep concern over the amount of notice given to students who learn they will NOT be receiving funding. The issue is that there is often not enough time to secure other teaching positions by the time you find out NU won’t be hiring you.
Matt Hunt meeting = see #2
COGS meeting = one staff member noted to COGS reps that those students who are not receiving future funding “are very much aware of why,” suggesting to us that personal meetings are held. While faculty appreciated this issue, they blamed the late funding allocations by the university and suggested their hands were tied.
4. Students are upset about a couple of issues surrounding office hours. One, some professors seem to not hold any. Two, professors say they will be in their office from X time to Y time, but are never present, leaving the students waiting in the hallway for them to show up. For graduate students, office hours means you will actually be physically in your office, not at lunch or running errands throughout the dept. Related to this, professors don’t seem to be keeping the front office informed about when they plan to miss office hours for such reasons as not being on campus that day, or being out of town. Three, students have noticed that office hours are being used by professors to hold long meetings with students they’re advising. This makes it nearly impossible for other students to “drop in,” as office hours would suggest.
Matt Hunt meeting = students should make appointments, even during office hours. This should avoid the problems of not being able to meet with students. Matt shared that his brother, who is also a professor, always gives students who are enrolled in classes priority during office hours. To that end, students can knock or interrupt if the prof. is with someone that’s not enrolled, and the prof. will have to make time for them. There was no discussion of making this the standard in our dept. It was just shared as an idea.
Dr. Hunt did confirm that faculty members are required by the Dean’s Office of Arts & Sciences to hold three office hours per week. However, if professors are on sabbatical, they’re not required to hold any. Dr. Hunt said he didn’t know the required standard for professors who were not on sabbatical but also not teaching.
COGS meeting = one faculty member said it’s every faculty member’s responsibility to hold office hours, and to have them posted. The front office confirmed that office hours will be typed and displayed uniformly on faculty doors, as was done in the past. Another faculty member emphasized that students should make appointments, even during office hours. This way the faculty member knows they are coming and will (should) be sure to be available.
5. While the students appreciate COGS reps being present at COGS meetings, they have requested more general meetings with the graduate director to be held. Because this is your first semester as grad. director, we don’t know if you were planning on holding more meetings or not. This is simply something that has been requested.
Matt Hunt meeting = Dr. Hunt would like to know what topics we would like workshops presented on. He likes the idea of a regular seminar series. Previous topics have included:How to apply for a grant, how to write a dissertation proposal, how to write a dissertation. Some suggestions received include: how to write a comp, how to give a job talk, how to get published?
6. Advising: those students that entered in 2004-2005 (now 3rd years) were assigned a temporary advisor at orientation. However, this did not occur for the 2nd or 1st years, since then. Students have expressed concern that they are “floating loose” or “drifting aimlessly,” with no one guiding their progress through the program. This seems to be especially true for those students who do not come into the program with a specific mentor in mind, or who have not decided on their specialty. Perhaps some kind of student-faculty mentoring/advising could be in place for these students.Matt Hunt meeting = Dr. Hunt agreed and said he would make temporary assignments.
COGS meeting = Since last week’s grad student director meeting, when it was promised that temporary advisors would be named, they since have been. Students should be, according to staff, receiving notice of their advisors today (Oct. 5). This includes both first and second year students. Please alert your friendly COGS reps if you do not receive this by the end of this week. These may be in your mailboxes in 549 Holmes or via email.
7. Grad/Undergrad crosslisted classes: “While this is good for faculty members since they can reach both groups at the same time, and gives grad students a wider variety of classes, it is detrimental to grad students when class is geared towards the undergrads and taught at a lower level. If a grad class is going to be offered to undergrads or vice versa, the class must be taught at the level of a grad class (and restrict entry to serious undergrad students only) or it’s a waste of class time. However, crosslisted classes within the social sciences/humanities grad programs would be great. The history department is teaching really interesting classes this semester, for example.” (this came from a grad student’s email to me). On a related note, students would appreciate the department making some effort to make them aware of cross-listings that might apply to them.
Matt Hunt meeting = The new president is very gung-ho about a new 5 year BA/MA program, which sociology will be participating in. It is unclear as to what will happen to the co-op experience for these students, but it may be that co-op will have to be forfeited in order to finish in 5 years. He suggested that cross-listing classes will not be problematic concerning the quality of the class. COGS reps reminded him that decreased quality is already an issue in one class. This class is being offered now, being team taught with a faculty member from another college within Northeastern. A large portion of the enrolled students are undergraduate, and students have expressed concern about the poor quality of the class, which they attribute to the presence of undergraduate schools. Dr. Hunt was not aware of this issue and said he would look into it.
COGS meeting = One faculty member expressed concern that non-sociology graduate students were being registered for their class without their knowledge. While the students this semester are keeping up, this was recognized as a potential problem. Faculty discussed the option of officially limiting graduate courses to sociology graduate students. Staff reminded that this is a contentious issue because the department needs extra-departmental students to keep enrollments up, so that the course can be offered (at least 5 students must be enrolled).
In the cases where classes are cross-listed, faculty agreed that the professor teaching should make themselves available for additional meetings with the graduate students. In reference to the upcoming combined BA/MA 5-year program that is being encouraged by the new president and Arts & Science dean, discussion was held as to the academic standards of cross-listed courses. Specifically, students would have to maintain a 3.75 GPA in Sociology to be considered for the master’s coursework. Faculty feel this will avoid the “watering down” effect that students have complained about.
8. Students are concerned about the lack of advanced quantitative classes available to fulfill the required advanced methods course. If I remember correctly, last time this complaint came up, it was asking for more qualitative. The point remains the same: quantitative-focused students, as well as qualitative-focused students deserve to have an advanced methods course offered each year.Matt Hunt meeting = As the new college comes up, required stats courses in several departments will essentially be the same. When this happens, students will be able to take their required stats courses in other departments, which will open up our faculty to teach more advanced methods courses. Until then, faculty resources make it impossible to guarantee both an advanced quantitative and qualitative methods course each year.
COGS meeting = No decisions were made here. One faculty member suggested that those faculty members not currently engaged in research and publication should be encouraged to take on more courses in substantive or methodological areas. Faculty members agreed that students should be encouraged to check out advanced methods offerings in other departments (these usually count for the advanced methods requirement; check with Chrisie first). For those courses that students would like to count for advanced methods requirement, COGS can be petitioned to accept them, if they’re not already accepted.
9. Students are still unable to get into the building regularly at nights and on weekends. This is especially a concern for students who have late classes outside of the building and need to be able to return to their offices.
Matt Hunt meeting = Matt Hunt talked to Tom Koenig about this, who said it is impossible to get keys. This is related to a series of break-ins and large thefts several years ago. Matt suggested the graduate students do some informal organizing. He was informed that we’ve already tried that, and it didn’t work. He wasn’t aware that math graduate students have keys and would look into it.
COGS meeting = Staff stated that the building was not locked until 11pm. COGS reps stated that several students have had problems getting into the building as early as 6 pm. Faculty members were surprised by these problems, as well as by the fact that math graduate students have keys to the building. Staff reminded us that it is impossible to get keys and we should drop it. Instead, the front office agreed to print every student (who wants it) official departmental letters to be carried on our person to show public safety. This way, we can call public safety and wait for them to come and open the door. Official “I belong here” papers can be shown to prove that you should be let into the building.
10. Has there been progress towards standardizing, in some way, the comps lists, or comps process?
Matt Hunt meeting = Dr. Hunt said that there was a standardization of the number of works made by Danny Faber when he was still graduate director. He said this is available on the dept. website. Dr. Hunt is pro-standardization. He acknowledges that this would require serious commitment on the part of the faculty to form subcommittees. He wanted to know what the graduate students think about this: do we want standardized areas, standardized lists of works (required or suggested), or something else?
There was also discussion of having old comps (reading lists) available in the front office, as well as old dissertations. Dr. Hunt agreed with this idea but noted that other things on our “concerns” list would take higher priority than this.
COGS meeting = Faculty discussed the idea of publishing standard comps lists through topic area subcommittees. COGS reps reminded COGS faculty members that a standard required list is NOT desired. Instead, a list of “core works” or “suggested works” is more appropriate. This will avoid students being required to read works that do not fit into their comp.
One faculty member suggested the idea of a “core concepts” list, rather than a “core works” list. The reason given for this was that the works considered important would change too often to reasonably update the lists. Some faculty members agreed with this and were excited by the idea of a concepts list. Other faculty members argued that discovering important works was part of the comps “excavation” process, and to provide students with a list would be doing part of their work.
11. tracking: How closely does the department follow our progress through the program?
Matt Hunt meeting = Dr. Hunt agreed that it would be nice to do some kind of end of the year “round up” with all the faculty discussing how each student is doing. Then letters could be drafted to communicate with students their standing in the department. Students agreed this would be a welcome improvement.
COGS meeting = COGS reps recommended that faculty members be more open and frank in their discussions of individual graduate student progress. This will give students a better idea of whether or not they are “maintaining satisfactory progress,” a requirement for receiving future funding.
12. Students have voiced concerns over the lack of racial and ethnic diversity among graduate students and faculty members. Does the department currently, or have future plans to, make diversity a priority during the hiring and graduate admissions process?
Matt Hunt meeting = confirmed that actively encouraging ethnic and racial minorities to apply here is a priority for the school. Also noted that the Office for Affirmative Action at Northeastern does weigh in during the hiring process specifically for the purpose of promoting diversity.
COGS meeting = According to one faculty member, efforts are constantly made to actively recruit, accept, and fund racial and ethnic minority students. However, federal guidelines concerning foreign students have made it difficult to produce diverse cohorts.
13. teaching tutorial = what is the process and are there any standardized requirements?
COGS meeting = Faculty members agreed that some sort of professional training should be a priority for the department. They also agreed that the teaching tutorial three credit requirement should be maintained. Various suggestions of proseminars, required attendance workshops, and once-weekly class meetings were made. One faculty member reminded us that this would upset faculty who were more interested in teaching in their substantive area. Another faculty member got upset at this suggestion, reminding the COGS members that professional socialization is part of their jo
