Dundee University Students’ Association Student Representative Committee Meeting 18/10/11 at 6pm Attendees: IM, IK, SF, TD, JM, AB, SS, AJ, AS, GBU, SB, AD, JA, SG, TL, KW, CF, FL, CM, AO, SM, MH, FP, LS, NM, NA, SW Apologies: RD, NG, KB, MA, KJ, AA, AM ACTION 1.
Minutes of Previous SRC – Paper A
JA proposer JM seconder Passed unanimously Minutes of Merger Meeting – Paper B AJ proposer SG seconder Passed unanimously Paper C – Surgery Motion (FL) FL - Need to make sure that people are aware of SRC, advertised surgeries a good idea, only needs one person there and a contact list available of all members. TD – Could possibly need a confidential room if people want to talk about private things. FL – Could book a room for that, contact details also allow contact via email if people prefer that. FL Proposer AS Seconder Passed unanimously “The SRC members should hold weekly surgeries with students so that students can meet their representatives and discuss any issues they have.” Paper D – Merger Motion (CM) CM – Need to create more of a campaign in Dundee about meeting, 4
November at Abertay, we can go out hand out leaflets flyers etc. Should be more vocal on the issue with student body at large. AJ – Is the date set as SU dinner on that day? CM – Yes, but there is a planning meeting tomorrow in Dalhousie at 6, will go over how its run, invitation has been sent to Mike Russell, MSPs, councillors, union reps etc. IK – Goes to heart of issue, useful for council to realise SFC now against forced merger, 4 years at least until we talk about it. Could make us look silly to oppose a merger that’s not going to happen. Backroom services – no information this will happen. Will work with Abertay to work towards helping those who would normally go to college. Lots of proposals are already redundant. CM – Backroom services - planned managerial and student services merges. Despite it not being frontline immediate merge, backroom merger still a threat to students and staff, students should be aware of that. Students don’t know anything about it. If an issue in future students need to be aware of that. Gone quiet after principal / SFC meeting. There was a paper at Court. IK – Was just a presentation, no paper, just an information exercise for those out of the loop. Last Wednesday Principal said SFC have backed away from merger, just going to be talks with no onus on anything. SMT see merger as a dead issue. Until we hear concrete proposals, nothing has been heard so far re backroom services, lots of rumours, IK not aware of anything through Senate. We need to make sure that college students still have the opportunity to go from college to uni. CM – Shown paper last week that compared things such as entrance tariff. There is an evaluation going on. If going down the road of collaboration that will impact students and staff. What will that collaboration mean, that is what meeting will be about. Can only frame argument if students get involved. IK – Talking about a dead issue could make us look uninformed, looking at collaboration is a sensible idea but hesitant to look at merger issue re student services as demographic so different between unis. Management aware that student awareness key as they want to sell it to student but merger dead issue. SF – What was the source of the paper? CM – Was from court NM - Have SFC officially dropped issue? IK – Said what happened was deplorable, any idea of a forced merger inappropriate, just more collaboration. Danger of merger passed. NM – Need to get involved in what collaboration will there be. IM – Can note our concern at what collaboration might be. Taking stance on dead issue is not a good idea. AB – Change wording of motion?
CM – Collaboration is a merger in all but name, support for public meeting, proposals still stand. Need to get more involved and let students know. Don’t want it to go unnoticed IM – We’re not going to wake up one day and find it’s happened, too much opposition. DUSA don’t want anything which could affect us badly to happen. Make students aware of collaboration. Other motions have lost potency. SS – 5th and 6th most relevance, 6th needs rewording. CM - “Closer collaboration” instead of merger in 5th. 7th should be kept in IM – ACAN separate from DUSA. Can organise a meeting AB – CM can set up meeting. AJ – Couldn’t condemn merger as doesn’t know its happening. CW - proposer AW - seconded For – 25 Against - 0 Abstains – 2 Motion: “The SRC supports on-going efforts to arrange a public meeting at the beginning of November which will have the purpose of conducting a constructive dialogue between students, parents, union leaders, politicians and other members of the community of how the closer collaboration will impact upon them and to debate alternatives. SRC members will show support, referred to above, by engaging in the promotion of the event through social networking, handing out flyers on campus, putting up posters and engaging with students, local businesses, oncampus societies and also other groups who may be effected by the plans. The SRC calls for a meeting of the Dundee University Anti-Cuts Action Network within the next seven days to discuss the merger and the route forward for Dundee University in opposition to cuts.” Paper E – SRC Election Motion (AW) CM – Underlying feeling not given enough flyers, need more, 200 at the beginning is too many so make second 100 optional. Magdalen and website involved possibly. Longer statement so people can get more of an appeal of who you are. Should be a place where you can get extra info about you. SF – Re. outreach to students, this was not poor because candidates not given enough flyers, walked around campus during elections saw 1 or 2 flyers, stuff plastered about the place, but need to speak to people to increase engagement. AW was the one who asked for the statement to be on the voting pages, if an 800 word statement for each person imagine if 10 people ran for WP, that
would be 8000 words to read, a huge strain on BB system and no one would read them. No limit to FB page. Can write what they want on FB page. Can’t have flyers with essay on it. Take on board re increase engagement and turnout, suggestion doesn’t fly. Elections work the same for years now, CB wrote how-to guide. We chose the number of flyers, worked as they all got elected. Motion doesn’t stand up. SG - Elections not reaching people, people not getting opportunities to run, unopposed positions. onus needs to be on getting people to run SF – The timescale for election is unfortunate, takes place right after academic appeals which is also Dep Pres’s job. Couldn’t take eye of either ball. Very pushed for time, next year going to have rejig of sabbs, Vice President of Engagement will take greater role in terms of engagement. IK – Shifting SRC elections to October or March. October better, September was too rushed, new students too busy settling in to run, don’t know what it is. Hard to get across what it is so early on. A lot more needs to be done, vast majority of people switched off and apathetic, trying to put across idea its worthwhile is hard. Could do 100 flyers, printing another 100 not good, need to set a fixed number, needs to be balanced. FB and websites can be used, but too rushed with quick turnaround. Need to change timeline. Like the idea of using Magdalen more, mini issue done for Freshers, could do one for SRC elections. TL – Colossal waste of paper. SS – Need to get people out, will make more of an impact. TL – Flyers go in bin or on the ground, outdated format. would be silly to increase. TD – So many people having 100 leaflets from each candidate would be ridiculous. So much wastage and waste of money and resources. Would be better if students got out in campus. KW – Had 2 elections in Canada, one for student council in March, turnout much higher and students got more involved. IK – Have hustings for Exec, not SRC, timing could be a problem IM – Too many people as they would all bring friends so would be no room for people unsure of who to vote for. MH – Is 800 words going to increase debate? AJ – Could do some in March, some in October. IK – Already elect School Presidents, Exec, Sports Union and more in March, Queens and St Andrews do it in October, gives us more time to set up. FP – Would stuff get done if started so late? IK – A balancing act. Can develop motion, 100 flyers can be looked at CM – Don’t think flyers are redundant, companies use them. Got rid of flyers in 3 hours, what do you do then? Upping flyers would encourage students to stay out longer. Leads in to people remembering and following year may stand. Flyers more personal than just speaking. Wasn’t that many SRC posters on billboards so flyers increased publicity AD – TVs behind bars, Liar, people gaze at them a lot, don’t get used enough, just a case of showing flyers. Radio station as well.
NM – Wouldn’t support flyers and posters, No one looks at them, they’re unsightly. 60 flyers is okay, don’t need 100. Can use web, videos. TD – Videos for Exec elections used Dusa TV, but candidates could make their own, would need more time. TVs behind bars has so much commercial stuff up already, everyone’s clips would clog the system. Could just have src screen. Discover Radio jingles take long enough as it is. AS – Had to explain to people what SRC was firstly, could have info campaign before position open to tell people what SRC and positions are GBU – Need to increase flyers. Getting the word out about SRC, publication really important, videos, meetings. Election in October would let people know what it is. If we did elections in March could start SRCs earlier. TL – Too many flyers from shops, never mind elections. First years never go to library early on anyway. SS – Suggest get moved to next SRC AW - Proposer CM – seconder Yes – 0 No - 25 Abstain – 2 Motion not passed. Paper F – Psychology School Merger (MO) MO – Not really got any solid evidence, Deans have been told merged into one school but have no argument for it. Geography got put together with Architecture and Town Planning. Going to happen to all the small schools. If it goes forward it doesn’t make sense, subjects don’t relate. Deans are against it, asked to propose motion to find out what student opinion is and whether we can fight against it if it happens. IK – Had a meeting with Pete Downes at 5pm today, he said that they will look to merging them with CASE, feels like Psychology odd one out in CASS. Had meetings with Deans, administratively that’s what he’d like to see, no arguments for or against. No impact on L&T. Timescale is the start of the next academic year. TD – Psychology would make more sense in Life Science, Psychology students can do Life Sciences modules. MO – Would make more sense yes, but how would it affect degree pathways? TD – Could be problems with advisors, different degrees follow different routes.
SS – Can cause massive problems with lectures and timetabling, lectures split in half etc. AJ – Know of a Humanities student, can’t take subjects from different modules so he couldn’t do his degree of Politics and Psychology. IK – Won’t affect current degrees. Can have degree pathways between different colleges, surely pathways should still be viable. SM – Should be possible. AD – Don’t see what point an administrative move would be. SF – Would change who Psychology report to, line managers would change. From looking at it administratively. For us sitting here doesn’t make sense but principal doesn’t see any more of these single discipline schools. SMT think that Computing and Psychology make sense, can’t see how will damage it. AJ – Agree, would need changes in rules, would cause timetabling issues if made larger. IK- So far just been a conversation between Pete Downes and Deans, so more feedback a good idea. SW – Would make more sense to merge with similar colleges, i.e. life sciences. No vote needed. Paper G – Exec Update (IK) SF – Had busy month, lots of sub-committees, busy with fitness to practise hearings, landlord issues, John Cape a thorn in his side. IK – Will answer any questions people have. FP – How was Kirckaldy campus? SF – Quiet. AJ – Inspire 2012? SW – SU and DUSA working together to host event under Inspire banner, supported by Olympics. March event, application in by the end of month. IK – 2 elements, sporting and cultural – concentrate on green and tennis courts, cultural Olympic village with societies. DUSA provide food and drink from around the world. Fun Olympic and Paralympics sports to play. SW – Trying to get focus on Paralympics as well, wheelchair fencing, sitting volleyball, blind football, offering both versions of sports. Want a stadium next to the village. Medal table running throughout the day and closing ceremony. SG – Uni in process of writing 6 year strategy, going to look at who offers what, essentially an appraisal document, will feed into strategies of both organisations, issues change over times so need these appraisals. CM – St Andrews correspondence IK – goal to increase DUSA’s national presence, working to bring back CHESS. Having regular meeting, this one about Northern Services. Next
meeting about their RUK fees campaign. Have also discussed merger. Dialogue of working together, continuing work on big issues. Next step to take forward a national campaign re merger. CM – Glasgow? IK – Yes, but low level of involvement, proving difficult. SF – When CHESS went silent Glasgow had chair, new President wants to be chair again. Want some form of help from them though. AD – Shadow shifts? IM – Priority to get those who haven’t done one to do one, after that people can do more. AOCB Magdalen Article and SRC/student engagement (AJ) Can have discussions about increasing awareness. Can src issue response to article? Will work on increasing awareness. CM – Could we have a sub-committee for this. IK – Was one last year, looked at engagement, can be set up. Can look at minutes of last year. AJ – Should issue some sort of response AB – Can have meeting re this. TD - Could have meeting with media rep, members and journalist. CF – Magdalen articles already had to be in for next issue. CW – Motion to look into setting up sub-committee. Seconder – AJ Yes – unanimous SRC sub-committees (IK) first meeting next week, will get emailed by IM Disciplinary Judges panel dates set (IM)