Terence has a list!
- Webmaster search: still looking! Current one is graduating. Terence is currently learning how to fill in and keep website functional, but let him know if there’s anyone suitable. Should be easy to maintain, maybe a little work if we want to rebrand. Isa suggests we put it on grad-announce. The pay should be prorated. David could send it to ee-students-forum
- Grad announce is coming out next Friday. We have until noon tomorrow for items. Gabby has items.
- Nominations Commission: Terence sent an email out to gsc-members, they are still looking for representatives to serve on that.
- Terence will send out a link. Before leaving for Thanksgiving, he had a meeting with Rebecca who had brought the parking survey, and other R&DE and PT&S representatives, they have been very receptive to ideas and data, putting together a website where students can go to get most up to date info. They also sent the info out to EV residents, the website has most up to date info on the construction project and the parking situation. Based on their analysis, should be enough parking to maintain the current demand for EV spots. There will be more demand for the parking because of the loss in parking spots due to the project, but overall if you have an EV permit there should be enough. There are also other spots farther away which could be more convenient. Website with more info is here: https://transportation.stanford.edu/transportation-updates-escondido-village-residents
Nominations Commission Bill Round 3
- Third round of nominations from NomCom. They’ve been continuing to fill spots that are open. This is more on that. Terence proposes that we suspend the rules of order, Gabby seconds, motion passes unanimously. Voting to confirm round 3 of nominees, passes unanimously. Rules are reinstated.
Callisto Resolution Discussion
Shanta and Pau lead the discussion. Pau says, Callisto is website where people can report sexual assaults online. It’s only been tried by 2 universities so far (USF & Pomona), seems to have good feedback from the users. Shanta has more info for that later. It was brought up in the joint sexual assault committee and presented 2 weeks ago at the last meeting. It would be good to discuss and talk about any questions. Gabby says she got an email from a student, who was concerned about false reporting, and also about the follow up (what happens after the report is submitted). Shanta says, regarding the false reporting, because it is online, anyone could go and make an account and submit a report if they so chose to, so you could have vigilante reporting, or if a malicious person did it intentionally. If you report, if you submit the report, it gets sent to the Title IX coordinator, which prompts a letter from the coordinator to the person who submitted the report, which will say “come in and talk to me about this”. If someone submits a false report and gets that letter, it will become clear at that time that this either isn’t the right person, or that they don’t know what they’re talking about. False reporting is not exclusive to online technology, it could potentially make it easier, but it can already happen with the current system. It is a concern, but the benefits of the technology should outweigh the concerns here. There are a couple of options on how to use Callisto. The person using it, they will go online and answer all the questions and fill out the timeline of what happened, and have 3 options: save and not submit, save under condition that it only gets submitted if the perpetrator matches another record, or to immediately submit it. Any scenario where they submit it, the info gets sent to the Title IX coordinator who invites them in for a conversation. They will ask questions about what happened, etc, and will pass on the info to the Title IX investigator, who will investigate and talk to both sides and witnesses, evidence, and then make a decision on whether or not to charge the responding party, and then goes into the judicial process. To provide an update on where Stanford is with Callisto, UG Senate passed this last night, and the SARA office coordinator says she supports Callisto 100%. The senior associate who oversees Title IX and SARA office met with the founder of Callisto is interested in implementing it, and Rachel Samuels says that Callisto is sending a demo link to ASSU members who can try it out and get a feel of the interface and what questions are asked during the process. Based on what people think about the demo, the contract might be signed. Shanta is meeting with Lauren to talk more about this tomorrow, she wants to know what the students feel about it. Isa says, this is an anonymous service, if you send it you have to put in your email and you will get an email back, so say someone uses their Stanford email, that wouldn’t make it anonymous, how would anonymity be guaranteed? Shanta says you have to create an account first, no info about the account is given to the university until you hit the submit button. They encrypt all of their data, and the university doesn’t have access to that data. You can save a report and that’s anonymous, but the moment you submit, you are making an official complaint to the university at that point. A lot of people don’t immediately submit a report, so by allowing them to save a report but not submit it, allows them to chronicle a timeline of what happens, so if in the future they do decide to submit they can. David says, some students have raised concerns that the “save report for later reporting” option potentially opens up possibilities where a person can save a report with all the details, and use it years later when the accused has very little evidence that they can present about the case. Shanta says, this is not something she thought about, she can bring that up tomorrow, we might want to make sure there is equity for both sides somehow. Rosie says, there is nothing preventing someone from keeping their own record (for example a written one), hopefully people won’t do it. Shanta says, you can make a report and not proceed with the investigation, that goes on record in the school somewhere. You have the time, while you are a student at Stanford, to proceed with the case. It is already possible for people to make a report and not proceed with it. Sam says, to go back to reporting vs. conviction rates, this service can provide information to administrators so that they might be able to pre-empt someone with problematic behavior, since some cases are just inherently lacking in evidence, if someone has 2 reports on the same person and wouldn’t be able to provide enough evidence to convict, maybe they can reach out to the person saying that “hey we have these reports, maybe you can consider changing your actions.” Isa says, people could already be doing this over time, the tables are already skewed towards the victims, meaning they will always have more evidence than the person they are accusing. Yiren says, of course plaintiff will most likely have more evidence if they are initiating the case, but for burden of proof it is normally on the plaintiff’s side. David says, another thing he wonders about is the low percentage of graduate awareness of the Callisto program at these other campuses, according to the research documents that Shanta sent out. Shanta says, she doesn’t know how the schools implemented the Callisto service toward undergraduates or graduates. Ateeq asks, if we pass the resolution, what happens next? Shanta says, she can request that the demo links be requested to the GSC and UGS to get feedback. Ateeq asks, if we pass this resolution, is this full and final? David motions to table the resolution and discuss it more next week. Terence seconds the motion. David says, the motivation for tabling the vote on the resolution is to hash out more details on the details inside the resolution, such as coinciding the implementation period of the program to coincide with the campus climate survey reporting periods, in order to generate as much useful data as we can regarding the effectiveness of the program.
-Requesting funds for holiday mixer next Tuesday. Requesting food, alcohol, and decorations. There might be some concerns about it being off-campus. Tianze says, the representative said that the party will be held at someone’s house off-campus, and we said that it’s very hard for the GSC to fund such events because not everyone is willing to go to someone’s home to attend a party, that’s the reason it’s better to host it on campus. Isa says, events off-campus were prohibited last 2 years, they were reinstated but with specific rules. We fund events where all grad students feel comfortable in going. Home is in Redwood City, they’ve had event there last year and 40 ppl showed up, and the RSVP link has a carpool situation. Hosting it off campus makes people feel a better community, especially for this group of low-income people. Ateeq says, he appreciates what they are trying to do, has a logistical question – did they register this event with SAL, did they give feedback on what is allowed or not? They say no. He says he encourages them to register the event. David says it’s not on the calendar yet. Isa says she says they should have it on campus somewhere, maybe in Rains. Sam says, if they can provide proof that SAL is fine with this then we would feel more comfortable with it, because if we give an event money and there are problems with it then we can be liable for it. Rosie says, another point is, she doesn’t know if any of the Stanford apartment complexes that are being rented out by Stanford housing (subsidized off campus housing) can be used? Gabby says they have fees for the rentals at these places. Isa says final point, this would open a slippery slope regarding funding an event at someone’s house. Ateeq would like to motion to vote, with a comment that, he has held events on campus, so he is impressed that 40-50 ppl are willing to go off campus for the event, as long as they can show that event is registered with SAL to reduce any potential liability, if any at all, for the ASSU, then he would feel comfortable about it. Recommendation from Funding committee, $400 food, $40 event services, $70 alcohol, in total $510. Terence asks if anyone wants to motion to vote on $510 for off campus event, with SAL approval and addition to calendar. Ateeq motions to approve the off campus event as requested, with SAL approval and addition to GSC calendar, and the safety aspects are upheld. Rosie seconds. 5 in favor, 5 opposed, 2 abstentions. It does not pass. Voting on having the event on campus with addition to GSC calendar, it passes unanimously.
SNMA & BGSA request:
- Annual holiday party, will be next Friday at Black Community center from 8-11pm. Requesting food $1300, and alcohol. Expecting 150 ppl to show up. Also asking for event services. Isa says, the FO from SBBO (Stanford Black Biosciences Organization) did not show up on Monday for the event services, so they can’t recommend the event services amount. Recommendation for SNMA is $445 food, for BGSA is $445 food and $200 alcohol. Three groups that didn’t show up: Black Law Students Assoc requests $200 alcohol, and SBBO is requesting $128 event services, Black Engineering SA also requests $445 for food. We are voting on the recommendations of the 2 groups that showed up, recommendation totals $1090, voting, passes unanimously. For the groups who did not show up to the meeting on Monday, they will have to come next week.
Stanford German Students Assoc:
- They applied for 2 events. First event is a Christmas party that happens every year. Event has movies, sweets, and food. Asking for $60 event services, $250 food and $440 alcohol. Next event is Spring BBQ, which is an annual event, around 160 ppl show up, total would be $980, which breaks down to $80 event services, $500 food and $400 alcohol. It is a BBQ with food and beer. Terence says that neither event has been submitted to the GSC Calendar yet. Recommendation for the first event is as they applied. Voting on the first event, with conditions that it goes on the calendar, passes unanimously. Recommendation for the second event is also as applied. Voting on the second event, with conditions that it goes on the GSC calendar, passes unanimously.
Stanford Youth Cultural Exchange Initiative:
-Requesting for event this Saturday, it is an event called Chinese American Youth Educational and Artistic Trip to Stanford. There will be around 60 Chinese American students from around the Bay Area, they are showing them around campus and holding a discussion section in the East Asia library after the tour. Recommendation is $700 for food. There are 2 groups of students, one from 13-17 years old, another from 6-13 years old. This group is labelled as a community service organization. They have 5-6 Stanford students signed up. Voting on $700 for food, passes unanimously with 1 abstention.
Bill for Recognition of Indigenous People’s Day
Kathryn Treder is here. Hoping that this bill will affirm Stanford community’s devotion to the native community, and secondly to join the national movement towards recognizing indigenous people’s day. The bill’s status in the undergraduate senate, the UGS supports it but haven’t voted on it yet. They did not vote on it yet because maybe the GSC would want to modify something. Isa has a question about logistics. By getting Stanford to recognize Indigenous people’s day, does that mean we get the day off? What does the University have to do? Kathryn says the university does not have to do anything, it’s only ASSU that is doing it. Shanta says that maybe the SSE calendar would change, that might be the only thing that would change. Rosie says, the only argument she’s heard against this movement (an argument which she disagrees with), is that a lot of Italian Americans see Columbus day to celebrate being Italian American, which is what a lot of parades celebrate. She has struggled with this because she doesn’t want to take away from Italian American identity in favor of Native American identity, but at the same time she doesn’t want to celebrate genocide, so she’s not sure. Yiren asks about the origin of this dispute on Columbus day, David explains briefly some history behind it. Terence says this bill is on previous notice. Pau asks why this day has to be on Columbus day, why can’t we put it on another day? Kathryn says it’s to remove the celebration of Columbus and to replace it with remembrance of native Americans. David motions to table the bill to vote on it next week.
PhD Pathways Cosponsorship
This is a day-long event that was started last year. Elena Dancu is here, along with Josh Yim, who are the organizing team this year. The team is made up of 7 PhD students, some post docs, BEAM staff support. This is not a student association event. They really think this embodies what Stanford stands for in terms of PhD education. Want to hold an educational conference for grad students. Within the people who are supporting this year, that includes BEAM, School of Medicine, post doc affairs, alumni association, VPGE, Stanford Associates. This year the majority of people are still supporting them again. Breakdown of the education background, includes PhD students from all over the campus. People in the first years in their PhDs to people in their final years. This program is available on the second page of the handout, which includes different types of panels, speakers, workshops, it’s a wide variety of topics. This is a very expensive event ($35,000 total estimated). They are asking for the GSC to commit to roughly $5k toward the event, which is roughly 14-15% of the event. This is more about what Stanford grad students stand for, there doesn’t need to only be discussions on academia careers, but we should aim to explore other careers. There will be panels on education, arts, EdTech, and options for international students (among others). Isa says, do people need to pay ticket costs? They say yes, it’s $20 in tickets, they are aiming to sell $20 per ticket. Isa says, if we give $5k, we would be putting $16 per student, she thinks that we might spend too much money on this. Gabby says, this is a big event, they are using the alumni center and the room rentals, event services, and catering there are really expensive. Everything else is low. Rosie asks, this is marketed towards PhD and postdocs, but is it open to all grad students? For example there are lots of MS students in the School of Education. Elena says absolutely, they will have 2 panels focused on education, one focused on curriculum design and Ed Tech, other on K-12. They will invite PhD alumni from Stanford, but this will be alumni from PhD and MS levels as well, every grad student is welcome to come. Terence asks, maybe it is possible to rename it from “PhD Pathways” to something broader? They say maybe, they can definitely take it to their committee and ask. They sold 330 tickets last year, had attendance of 84% (274 came). They had testimonials and they were great. The attendance fee is also to ensure that people attend. Josh says, last year they didn’t know how many people to expect, the expected attendance for this year would just be to match last year’s attendance. Pau says, if the GSC put money toward the event, will we be acknowledged? They say definitely, they can even put up a GSC banner. Last year they capped the attendance at 300 and sold out. Elena says they also welcome input from the GSC about people to invite and panelists. It is a 10 person committee, but they welcome people to come join the planning meetings. Isa asks, do they have a plan if they receive extra money? Maybe use the other funding sources to reimburse first. They gave the money back last year but they’ll keep that in mind for this year. Elena says, they will not use the money to pay students or any other restrictions. They will need a bill to pass the GSC before Dec 15.
The event happened. It was a success. Probably the smoothest Thanksgiving yet. Fed 1836 people, seatings every 90 minutes. 2 very nice security guards there to watch over the dinner. People did not wait in time too long, longest wait was 7 minutes. There were 50-60 volunteers. Provost Etchemendy came, it was his last year. He assured Gabby that his successor will keep funding this next year. Gabby said the banner has also disappeared, seems like the Diwali event took it and didn’t return them. Gabby is very faux-upset.
Other Social Events
Next Friday, there is the “Silent Night” party from 5-8pm at Terman fountain. There will be a DJ and everyone will get cool headphone pieces that flash with different colors depending on which channel you’re listening to. There are also appetizers, trying to approach it as a “work holiday party” etc. It’s a silent disco. There will also be a photobooth and outdoor heaters, coffee, hot chocolate, non-alcoholic apple cider. Rules for the event. Rule 1: no outside alcohol and the party is alcohol-free. Rule 2: return the headphones when you leave. Appetizers include veggie/cheese platters, meatballs with diff sauces, non-gendered snowperson cookies.
- Retreat: Pau is organizing a retreat.
- NomCom Bill revision: Shanta says, yesterday when Senate voted on the NomCom bill they actually amended it by striking out a line saying that Jackson is the parliamentarian. David motions to revote on the NomCom bill in lieu of the inaccurate language, Terence seconds. Vote taken, passes unanimously.
- David says, he thinks it might be a good idea for representatives that serve on university committees to begin submitting meeting minutes, or to put together reports on what’s been happening in these committees. Terence says, it might be a good idea, but we should remember that some committees are confidential and closed meetings where there are no public minutes. Shanta says, starting with the appointments that they are making this fall, these people are required to make quarterly reports, so they are starting to try that out to see how that would work.