Q&A with AMS executive candidates

The Homecoming position’s job description and salary will need to be worked out in greater consultation with the AMS Municipal Affairs Commissioner, AMS permanent staff, the AMS Board of Directors and university Administration.

The position’s focus will be on the logistical aspects of homecoming, while assisting the Municipal Affairs Commissioner with the political aspects. The relationship would be similar to the Orientation Roundtable Coordinator and the Campus Activities Comissioner. Funding assistance could be sought out through the administration who also has a vested interest in improving Homecoming. While an exact dollar figure cannot be given at this time, it will likely be comparable to Orientation Round Table Coordinator as it is similar in responsibility and duration.

We want to try to coordinate the Orientation Week survey with the Fall Referendum. We will distribute the survey to first year students who participated, or chose not to participate in, faculty-run orientation and/or FYNIRS orientation and their leaders. An incentive will need to be negotiated; however, it is likely to be a discount from an AMS service, similar to the current incentive offered to vote.

We will compile the results into a report and use it to improve the work done by the Orientation Roundtable Coordinator. Furthermore, we will disseminate the information to the faculty societies and work with them to improve faculty specific orientation weeks. Ideally bench marks will be created and this will become an annual survey. It is easy to simply say that Frosh Week needs to change, but without hearing from the people who are directly affected by it or who chose not to be, we cannot assume that we have the answers.

When Irene Bujara, the executive director of the Human Rights Office, spoke with us, she mentioned a few different places that would be better for the office. However it is not about a specific location but about a space that is accessible, more private and sufficiently large enough for the office to continue its internship program and the operation of its resource library.

Similarly, Team WCW cannot cite an arbitrary amount of what the operating budget should be raised to. We simply know that 12,000 dollars is insufficient for the office to effectively run programming. The employees of the office spend a significant amount of time seeking grants and worrying about money, while the budget barely allows them to keep their resources in print. We want this office to be better supported and financed to show Queen’s commitment to human rights and student well-being.

We have discussed mandatory TA training with a few TAs, but most of our information on this subject came from Alexi White the Academic Affairs commissioner of the AMS. Mandatory TA training would benefit all students including TAs. Any job requires training –TA training would improve the quality of time spent in the classroom and make grading more consistent. Students shouldn’t hand in nearly identical assignments and receive different letter grades. In researching our platform, we talked to numerous students who told us versions of this story. Even in Commerce where TAs do receive training, it is more a logistical info session then about how to effectively do the job.

The AMS would not expect or request the responsibility of determining the precise details of the academic certificate. That isn’t really the place of the student government. This would be the responsibility of the professor(s) and/or department that would run and house the certificate program with consultation and input from students at large as well as the student government.

There is a lot of confusion about the way new departments are formed, especially the new departments that we’re looking to establish: Aboriginal Studies, African Studies and Middle Eastern Studies. First of all, it must be noted that none of these departments would need to start from scratch as there are many courses already in existence that can be grouped together to form them. For example, for a department like Middle Eastern Studies there already exists Politics of the Middle East, Introduction to Islam, Islam in the Modern World, Arab-Israeli Conflict and Regional Security, Modern Middle East, and Politics of Israel (to name a few) but they’re all in different departments. If grouped together, funding would only be required for the administrative aspects, and for several new courses, as opposed to funding for all new professors and all new courses. Furthermore, the way the University’s academic budget works is that there is a percentage allocated to new programming every year. As such, money would not be coming from other departments’ cuts. As well, in order to get a department approved by Senate it has to go through an extremely bureaucratic 5-step process in which the budget is reviewed at each step. In other words, while proposing how these departments are going to be funded, the Senate will not accept “by making cuts in other departments” as an answer. We are not guaranteeing that these programs will be established for next year, although we hope that we can establish at least one. Patrick Deane (VP Academic) is very interested in these initiatives, and so long as there is pressure from the students, he says, the University will be committed to finding the funding for it.

Our main goal with the broadening of Frosh Week is to ensure that all students are feeling properly welcomed and get a very good idea of what Queen’s is all about. After speaking to many students about this issue, we’ve realized that there are plenty of students who do not feel that it currently does that. That being said, there are many students who do, in fact, enjoy Frosh Week. The point here is that there is a need for more alternatives so that all students have something that they feel comfortable doing during Frosh Week. We plan to have many paid feedback forums with first year students regarding potential alternatives. In terms of working with SOARB, we plan to report all of our findings regarding what is enjoyed, what is not, and what some systemic issues may be. The difference between SOARB and what we plan to do with Frosh Week, is that we plan on getting direct student input and creating new events to meet these needs, while SOARB looks more at creating policies to address the systemic issues.

In no way do we advocate for unhealthy or overworked mentalities or lives however we do stress the need to provide students with safe, affordable, and accessible options, particularly in their choice of study or fitness regimen. As AMS Executive we just want to ensure that students know their options and can get extended hours if they want them.

NAD is of the utmost importance to us and must remain student run. This year has seen a drastic increase in prosecutions and sanctions which shows the system is being used. We recognize the need for more money for this system and as such have allocated $5,000 for increased operation and promotion of our unique brand of student-run non-academic discipline, both on campus and in the Kingston community.

We are against the idea of non-academic infractions showing up on student transcripts and we will continue to voice our concerns while keeping an open dialogue with the University administration. Currently the vague nature of the language in the draft Code of Conduct is something that must be clarified in the best interest of students.

In discussion with many students, both the technical accessibility and the ease of access to information is still not up to par, hence something must be done. In speaking to Tim Ginn, President of COMPSA, the AMS website is still not accessible to everyone, such as the visually impaired. Through simple upgrades this could be changed to ensure maximum accessibility for everyone.

Furthermore, an overhauled interface and a quick-link calendar on the front page would make important dates and events easy to find while making access to information regarding clubs, groups, jobs, services, commissions, etc. all at the fingertips of students.