TOWN HALL MEETING 16 JAN 2000 - 2200 AGENDA CONSTITUTIONAL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

town hall meeting
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

TOWN HALL MEETING 16 JAN 2000 - 2200 AGENDA CONSTITUTIONAL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

16TH UNIVERSITY SCHOLARS CLUB MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE TOWN HALL MEETING 16 JAN 2000 - 2200 AGENDA CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CHEAH WENJIE (PRESIDENT) REVAMPED GUI PROCEDURE HILLARY TAN (VICE-PRESIDENT COMMUNITY LIFE) GER1000 - THE ISSUES


slide-1
SLIDE 1

TOWN HALL MEETING

16 JAN 2000 - 2200

16TH UNIVERSITY SCHOLARS CLUB MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

slide-2
SLIDE 2

AGENDA

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CHEAH WENJIE (PRESIDENT) REVAMPED GUI PROCEDURE HILLARY TAN (VICE-PRESIDENT COMMUNITY LIFE) GER1000 - THE ISSUES DEVESH NARAYANAN (VICE- PRESIDENT WELFARE) WELFARE PACKS DEVESH NARAYANAN (VICE- PRESIDENT WELFARE) SPACES UPDATE HONG SHAO YANG (HONORARY GENERAL SECRETARY) SHOULD WE CONTINUE WITH RAG AND FLAG? (DISCUSSION) CHEAH WENJIE (PRESIDENT)

slide-3
SLIDE 3

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

CHEAH WENJIE I.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

DRAFTING AMENDMENTS: ERRORS IN PHRASING, ADDED CLARITY, RE-NUMBERING OF PROVISIONS. SUBSTANTIVE AMENDMENTS: THREE AMENDMENTS CALLING OF EGMS MAKING IT HARDER TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION USC SUBSIDIARY REGULATIONS

slide-5
SLIDE 5

CALLING OF EGMS

TLDR: INSTITUTE FAIR RULES FOR CALLING OF EGMS

20 signatures sufficient to call an EGM. 3 days' notice mandated. Rules on agenda not present. 20 signatures = 2 cliques? Insufficient to mount proper defence. Open to abuse

CURRENT PROBLEM

slide-6
SLIDE 6

CALLING OF EGMS

TLDR: INSTITUTE FAIR RULES FOR CALLING OF EGMS

USC OTHERS

NUSSU Constitution: 5 days' notice. At least forty-five (45) Union Members can call a meeting. NTUSU Constitution: 3 days' notice. Five percent of the Union members or two hundred (200) members, whichever is lesser, can call a meeting. Companies Act: 14 - 28 days' notice Two or more members holding at least 10% of the issued share capital can requisition or call a meeting. 20 signatures sufficient to call an EGM. 3 days' notice mandated. Rules on agenda not present.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

CALLING OF EGMS

TLDR: INSTITUTE FAIR RULES FOR CALLING OF EGMS

PROPOSED RATIONALE

2 cliques to call a general meeting is too low a threshold. Prone to abuse - frivolous calls for EGMs which the Management Committee is obliged to hold. All general meetings already require a quorum of at least 10% of all members or 100 members, whichever is lower. 10% of all members, or forty-five (45) members, whichever is lesser, sufficient to call an EGM.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

CALLING OF EGMS

TLDR: INSTITUTE FAIR RULES FOR CALLING OF EGMS

PROPOSED RATIONALE

Compliant with NUSSU's regulations. Allows sufficient time to prepare a proper defence

  • r counter-argument(s).

Allows more time to change prior appointments to accomodate a meeting. 5 days' minimum notice mandated.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

CALLING OF EGMS

TLDR: INSTITUTE FAIR RULES FOR CALLING OF EGMS

PROPOSED RATIONALE

The notice calling a meeting must contain sufficient information to enable a prudent member to decide whether or not he will attend the meeting (Common law rule). Otherwise, ability to amend agenda may allow party to spring surprise motions for the general meeting. Only items on agenda can be discussed in general meeting. Any amendment of agenda requires fresh notice.

slide-10
SLIDE 10

MAKING IT HARDER TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION

TLDR: TOO EASY TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION

CURRENT PROBLEM

By its definition, a Constitution represents the “fundamental principles" of a body by which it is

  • governed. Fundamentals cannot be regarded as

such if it is easily amendable. Prone to abuse if a Management Committee can alter their powers and responsibilities unilaterally, without need to consult the club members who elected them. 2/3 of members of the Management Committee to amend or revoke the Constitution. .

slide-11
SLIDE 11

MAKING IT HARDER TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OTHERS

Singapore Constitution: Must be passed by no less than two-thirds of the total number of the elected Members of Parliament. Companies Act: Must be passed by not less than three-fourths of members at General Meeting. NUSSU: Must be passed by votes of not less than two-thirds of the total number of the Voting Council Representatives present during the Meeting + To be ratified by NUS Board of Trustees. Other Constituent Clubs: Must be passed by at least two-thirds of Members at General Meeting. NTUSU: At least two-thirds of the members present at the General Meeting must vote in favour

  • f such amendments + Student Affairs Office to agree + 3 year interval only.
slide-12
SLIDE 12

MAKING IT HARDER TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION

TLDR: TOO EASY TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION

PROPOSED RATIONALE

In line with most other NUSSU Constituent Clubs. In line with Constitutionalism principles. Protects USC members from unilateral changes by the Management Committee. 2/3 of members of USC at General Meeting to amend or revoke the Constitution.

slide-13
SLIDE 13

USC SUBSIDIARY REGULATIONS

TLDR: FLEXIBLE BUT FORMAL REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

CURRENT PROBLEM

Potentially problematic inconsistencies between administrations. Lack of stable and clear framework for students to follow. Opaque governance and decision-making processes. Administrative frameworks and regulations exists only in informal documentation Management Committees adopt/revoke/create regulations every year.

slide-14
SLIDE 14

USC SUBSIDIARY REGULATIONS

TLDR: FLEXIBLE BUT FORMAL REGULATORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK

PROPOSED RATIONALE

Formalise structures and processes within USC, by giving them a written regulatory framework Clarity accorded to these processes, allowing USC members to follow or debate on them. Flexibility for Management Committee of the day to amend Subsidiary Regulations to push through their initiatives. Formally provide for creation of USC Subsidiary Regulations to formalise rules on GUIs, IGs and upcoming Central Repository. USC Subsidiary Regulations can be amended by two-third majority of Management Committee members at a regular meeting.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

CALLING OF EGMS MAKING IT HARDER TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION USC SUBSIDIARY REGULATIONS

slide-16
SLIDE 16

REVAMPED GUI PROCEDURE

HILLARY TAN II.

slide-17
SLIDE 17

HTTP://TINYURL.COM/USCCOMMLIFEFORMS

slide-18
SLIDE 18

GER 1000 THE ISSUES

DEVESH NARAYANAN III.

slide-19
SLIDE 19

GER1000

QR AS DIFFERENTIATOR FOR NUS STUDENTS LONG TERM PLAN IS TO HAVE A TIERED SEQUENCE OF QR MODULES TO ENSURE NUS STUDENTS ARE QR READY

IMPORTANCE OF QUANTITATIVE REASONING IN NUS’ ACADEMIC VISION

slide-20
SLIDE 20

USP'S ROLE

TLDR: TEST BED

USP pioneers a three-tiered QRF module with:

  • 1. GER1000 (Tier 1)
  • 2. USP’s QRF (Tier 2)
  • 3. USP QR-based Inquiry modules (Tier 3)
slide-21
SLIDE 21

POSITIONING GER1000 VIS A VIS USP QRF

Overlap of Content? Both GER and QRF need improvement: QRF needs to be pushed higher into the 2nd Tier GER needs to continue revising its curriculum and pedagogy

slide-22
SLIDE 22

POSITIONING GER1000 VIS A VIS USP QRF

Overlap of Content? From: To:

GER1000 QRF GER1000 QRF

slide-23
SLIDE 23

WORKLOAD MANAGEMENT

ANOTHER MODULE TO READ? Generally, number of MCs to read is unchanged. But some students have it tougher: Students who can’t read WCT in Sem 1 Scheduling conflicts (Pharmacy, for example) Law students (can only read Tiers 2 & 3)

slide-24
SLIDE 24

MOVING FORWARD

Faculty and the University: USC: Working together to relook at the learning outcomes and curriculum of the two courses, to minimize overlap Data Collection to assess the impact of the GER module and its success in meeting learning objectives Data Collection through periodic surveys and a long-term data collection strategy Amplify the voice of the community

slide-25
SLIDE 25

FINAL THOUGHTS

Going back to how things were is ‘unproductive’ Continuous collection of feedback, and more conversations with the community

slide-26
SLIDE 26

WELFARE PACKS

DEVESH NARAYANAN IV.

slide-27
SLIDE 27

ONE STUDENT ONE PACK PREMISE 1 PREMISE 2 CONCLUSION

NUSSU’s budget allocation for welfare packs is calculated based on the total number of students in the university Even though USP students are in two faculties, they only count once in the population statistics USP students must only get one welfare pack

slide-28
SLIDE 28

BUDGET BREAKDOWN $24 $13125

$4 to USC $4 to Home Fac $0.5 per pax goes to welfare packs $4 to USC $4 to Home Fac $8 to NUSSU $8 to non-faculty clubs

slide-29
SLIDE 29
slide-30
SLIDE 30
slide-31
SLIDE 31

DISCONTINUING WELFARE PACKS TO USC

NO OTHER HALLS/RCS RECEIVE EXTRA WELFARE PACK FROM NUSSU WELFARE REASON FOR DISTRIBUTION TO RC COULD BE DUE TO PAST AGREEMENT IF SO, MATTER SHOULD BE REOPENED FOR NEW ARRANGEMENT

CASE ONE: ARGUMENT FROM PRINCIPLE

slide-32
SLIDE 32

DISCONTINUING WELFARE PACKS TO USC

WELFARE SURVEYS AND PACKS ARE GIVEN OUT TO THE FACULTY CLUBS, WHO MAKE THEIR OWN ARRANGEMENTS FOR DISTRIBUTION SOME FACULTIES ENFORCE THE ONE PACK PER STUDENT POLICY LESS STRINGENTLY THAN OTHERS NO WAY TO ENSURE THAT THE WELFARE PACK POLICY IS ADHERED TO THEREFORE, DISCONTINUE WELFARE PACKS FOR USC

CASE TWO: ARGUMENT FROM ADMINISTRATIVE EFFICIENCY - DECENTRALIZED DISTRIBUTION STRATEGIES

slide-33
SLIDE 33

NUSSU PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

  • 1. Give NUSSU data about all our students, so they can systematically block

USP students from access to two welfare packs

  • 2. Discontinue welfare pack allocation to USC, but provide excess

sponsored items and NUSSU welfare pack items for us to build our own welfare pack.

slide-34
SLIDE 34

NUSSU PROPOSED SOLUTION (II) PROS

Shorter welfare pack surveys Access to 2 x Welfare Packs* Contingent on the existence

  • f spare items from NUSSU’s

welfare packs USC will be the only faculty to not receive a welfare pack from NUSSU

CONS

slide-35
SLIDE 35

SPACES UPDATE

HONG SHAO YANG V.

slide-36
SLIDE 36

THEME INCLUSIVE

Home and the idea of shared ownership Conceptual changes to TR1 and Proto Studio Minor changes to TR2, lifts, Chatter, lobby

ENGAGING

slide-37
SLIDE 37

WELFARE SURVEY 389 PARTICIPANTS

Cleanliness Lack of quiet studying spaces Also: doodle/corkboard, pool table (83) , drumset (38)

slide-38
SLIDE 38

WORK SO FAR

Clean-up of TR1, TR2 and Prototyping Studio is underway Removed bulky items inside Proto in Sem 1 Old bean bags removed in TR2 Furniture removed in TR1

slide-39
SLIDE 39

CONCEPTS

Proto

  • A maker’s studio + storage for bulky

wooden and metal poles TR1

  • Designated quiet study area

TR2

  • Feel: leisure + family

Chatter

  • Mixture of relax + play.
slide-40
SLIDE 40

FUTURE INITIATIVES

Spaces Supplies Themed lifts Movable mirrors

slide-41
SLIDE 41

APPENDIX I

Initially conceptualised as a music / dance studio But idea was scrapped Now: minimalist style with little furniture What has been done Carpet cleaning Removed furniture Akan Datang: a designated quiet studying space?

TR1

slide-42
SLIDE 42

APPENDIX II

Feel: leisure; family Leisure equipment Pool Table, Karaoke Machine, Air Hockey, Pinball Machine, Dart Board What has been done Old bean bags has been tossed - unsustainable to clean Xbox area has been cleaned Akan Datang: Bring in equipment if possible

TR2

slide-43
SLIDE 43

SHOULD WE CONTINUE WITH RAG AND FLAG?

CHEAH WENJIE VI.

slide-44
SLIDE 44

DISCUSSION BACKGROUND CONCLUSION

Meaning of Rag and Flag Histories Current Practices

slide-45
SLIDE 45

THANK YOU

16TH UNIVERSITY SCHOLARS CLUB MANAGEMENT COMMMITEE