Section 1 | Section 2 | Section 3 | Section 4a | Section 4b | Section 4c | Section 4d | Section 4e | Section 4f | Section 4g
| Section 4h | Section 4i | Section 5 | Section 6 | Section 7 | Section 8 |
IV-G. RESPONSE BY
THE DEPARTMENT OF SLAVIC LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES TO THE EIGHT-YEAR REVIEW
We
are gratified by the praise for the Department's stature and the accomplishments
of both the graduate and undergraduate programs, but we have also taken the
harsh criticisms to heart. In a series of four faculty meetings in late
September and early October and a number of less formal gatherings of the
Department's literature and linguistics caucuses we passed approximately twenty
motions designed to address each of the recommendations made by the internal
review team and the external review team and to redress the offenses they set
forth. To a large extent the motions arose from a careful perusal of all
materials relevant to the report. These include the questionnaire distributed
by the Department to graduate students in the spring of 1999 in connection with
the preparation of the departmental self-review, notes on the discussion at the
meeting, the students' written responses following the meeting, the
self-review, the external report, the draft of internal report, the Chair's
response to the draft, the report itself, the response of the internal
committee chair to the Chair's response, the response of the external committee
to the report of the internal committee, and student comments solicited by the
graduate student representative Marilyn Gray, who also took active part in the
faculty meetings. Equally important, however, were the suggestions for dealing
with the issues garnered by the Chair during the summer from one-on- one
meetings with faculty members and a number of students and with Interim
University Ombudsperson Nancy Barbee, Dean of Humanities Pauline Yu, Dean of
the Graduate Division Claudia Mitchell-Kernan, and Associate Vice Chancellor
for Administration Allen Solomon.
Let
us begin by treating the issue the internal report revolves around, that is,
what it terms the unhealthy environment among the graduate students and its
relation to faculty conduct. Although we understand that an unhealthy
environment cannot be legislated out of existence, we feel we have taken the
necessary decisive actions to restore that environment to health. First and
foremost, we have undertaken to provide graduate students with a handbook that
will go a long way to lifting what they have perceived as the veil of secrecy
surrounding a number of departmental procedures. It will contain detailed
explanations of all current policies, including the ones recently passed in
connection with the review. Of the new policies the one most directly relevant
to the issue of faculty conduct is the establishment of a formal grievance
procedure in cases involving a potential violation of the Faculty Code of
Conduct. Given its central importance let us cite it in toto: Students
believing they have a grievance involving a faculty member are advised to
attempt to resolve the matter with the faculty member in question. If the
grievance remains unresolved or if students feel hesitant about approaching the
faculty member, they may bring the matter to the attention of the chair and
request the chair's mediation. At any point students may avail themselves of
the campus Ombuds Office. Other courts of resort include the Graduate Division
and the Office of the Dean of the Humanities. In cases of grievances involving
a potential violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct (see UCLA Faculty Handbook
[www.apo.ucla.edulapoweblfacultyhandbookl9.htm49c]) students may consult
with a member of the Academic Senate Grievance and Discipline Procedures
Committee (3125 Murphy Hall, 310-825.3891) for help in deciding on an
appropriate course of action. For further details see UCLA General Catalogue,
Appendix A, Charges of Violation. We are also undertaking a number of
initiatives to foster student-faculty collegiality: a) introduction of a new
system of advising that allows students to choose a mentor/adviser after the
first year, b) establishment of a pro-seminar team-taught by faculty members,
c) stipulation of norms for dissertation feed-back, d) modification and
clarification of norms for MA and PhD examinations, and e) development of
informal faculty-student seminars.
Now
let us go through the recommendations made by the review committees point by
point. The first three recommendations of the internal committee concern future
FTE's: 1) to "raise the current search for a nineteenth century
[literature] specialist to open rank", 2) to "seek a joint
appointment to fill the twentieth-century position," and 3) to "seek
a joint appointment to provide a permanent South Slavist." We have
obtained permission from the Dean for 1) and are actively lobbying for 2) and
3). In response to 4) - engaging the linguistics faculty in undergraduate
teaching - we have established a requirement for all faculty members to teach
at least one undergraduate course a year and have come up with several new
possibilities for undergraduate linguistics courses
(one
of which, Russian 40M [Language and Gender] is scheduled for the spring). We
have gone beyond the recommendation in 5) - to increase admissions selectivity
so as to reduce attrition - by agreeing not only to restrict admission to a group
of two to four exceptional students but also to follow the lead of many UCLA
departments and offer those students four-year packages. We have also gone
beyond the recommendation in 6) - to make the criteria for funding decisions
available to students in writing (which we have to in fact done for years) and
made the support process more "student-friendly" by a) soliciting a
yearly self-assessment of progress and information on circumstances adversely
affecting progress, and b) making public each spring the kinds and amount of
student funding the Department has for distribution and each fall the number of
students supported from each category. The latter also addresses the final
recommendation, 7), namely, to lift the veil of secrecy, which, as we have mentioned
above, is also the goal of the student handbook. The specific issue named in 7)
- admitting the MSO to faculty meetings - has been acted upon: the MSO (as well
as the Student Affairs Officer) attended the faculty meetings referred to above
and will continue to attend them.
Since
some of the recommendations of the external committee (1, 4, 9, 10, 11, and 12)
coincide with those of the internal committee, we will treat only the ones that
differ. We have again gone beyond the recommendation in 2) - to continue
seeking ways to appeal to a campus-wide audience - by offering yet another
writing-intensive literature course this quarter (Russian 25W [The Russian
Novel]), a new upper-division literature course in the winter (Russian 126
[Russian Drama]), a new lower-division writing course (Slavic 90), a new
lower-division linguistics course (the Russian 40M course alluded to above,
which is a General Education course crosslisted with East Asian Languages and
Cultures and Communication Studies) in the spring, and by proposing a freshman
honors seminar. The issue in 3) - a section of First-Year Russian with
twenty-six students - has not recurred. We have gone beyond the suggestions in
5) - to investigate ESL and foreign language departments as sources for TAships:
we are investigating Writing Programs and Comparative Literature as well and
have made the search for extramural funding a priority issue. As requested by
6), literature students now have an updated MA and PhD reading list;
linguistics students have an updated MA reading list, and PhD lists will be
compiled for each student on an individual basis. As requested by 7), we have
regularized the format and content for MA and PhD examinations, the MA
examination testing a broad, comprehensive knowledge of the field, the PhD
examination testing a number of specific topics in depth and including a
dissertation proposal. Reaction to 8) - methods for streamlining the program
and reducing the time-to-degree - was varied: the overwhelming majority of
students and faculty opposed the elimination of the MA examination, and we
therefore retained it. There was more controversy about whether the currently
required reading knowledge of French and German should be changed to French or
German, but in the end we decided to retain both and test only one, while
requiring the use of both in doctoral-level classes and examinations and in the
dissertation. We have instituted the suggested sub-specialty at the PhD level,
but made it optional so as not to encumber students who feel it would impede
their progress. We have not converted the "second Slavic language"
requirements to electives (conceivably as a PhD sub-specialty option) even
though, as the external committee pointed out, it might reduce the
time-to-degree, because the overwhelming majority of students and faculty
opposed the measure as incommensurate with the Department's profile and
commitment to excellence. Finally, we have implemented the suggestion of
abolishing the qualifying paper and made a dissertation proposal an integral
part of the doctoral examinations.
We
believe we have acted forcefully and in good faith to resolve the central but
intangible concern voiced by the internal report, that of the unhealthy
environment. (At the student-faculty welcome meeting this fall the Chair said,
"The internal report speaks of kinds of behavior that are damaging not
only to the learning environment but also to one's sense of self and mutual
respect. I want to assure you that as chair I will exercise the full power of
my office to discourage them and ensure that anyone who engages in them will be
held accountable."); we also believe we have addressed every other concern
raised in both reports, all of which are more tangible and more readily
repairable by repairing rules, regulations, and policy. We therefore request
that the Graduate Council reinstate the Department's right to admit graduate
students into its program, effective immediately. It may seem questionable
whether changes made over the eight months that have passed since the site
visit can resolve problems that developed over a period of eight years. Should
the Graduate Council have any doubts about the current ability of the
Department to create an atmosphere productive of intellectual stimulation and
growth, we invite you to ask the opinions of our students, including those
interviewed during and after the site visit. We request that you do so by your
meeting of 17 November, however, because we still hope to attract a cohort of
fine new students for the coming academic year and thus continue our mission
without a wrenching and potentially harmful hiatus. Our field is small and
tightly knit; word travels fast. Normalizing the situation is particularly
important at a time when Dean Yu. has authorized us to make an open-rank search
for the first new ladder faculty member in literature in nearly a decade: a
program in abeyance will hardly attract stellar applicants.
Please
let the Chair know if you have any questions. He will be happy to answer them
in writing prior to the meeting or in person at the meeting.
18
October 2000
Motions
Passed
1.
The Department shall issue a Graduate Student Handbook reflecting present
and/or revised policies.
2.
First year students shall receive advising from a troika consisting of the
Student Affairs Office (SAO), the Russian language coordinator, and the chair.
The SAO apprises students of general requirements, funding possibilities, etc.;
the Russian language coordinator assesses students' proficiency in Russian; the
chair reviews students' undergraduate records for strength and deficiencies
(French, German, background in general linguistics and literary theory). From
the second year on, students choose their own adviser. Should they desire, they
may change advisers in the fall of any year. Students must apprise the SAO of
the adviser selected.
3.
Students believing they have a grievance involving a faculty member are advised
to attempt to resolve the matter with the faculty member in question. If the
grievance remains unresolved or if students feel hesitant about confronting the
faculty member, they may bring the matter to the attention of the chair and
request the chair's mediation. At any point, however, students may avail
themselves of the campus Ombuds Office. Other courts of resort include the
Graduate Division and the Office of the Dean of Humanities. In cases of
grievances involving a potential violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct (see
UCLA Faculty Handbook [www.apo.ucla.edu/apoweb/facultyhandbook/9.htin#9c]) students may consult
with a member of the Academic Senate Grievance and Discipline Procedures
Committee (3125 Murphy Hall, 310-825-3891) for help in deciding on an
appropriate course of action. For further details see UCLA General Catalogue,
Appendix A, Charges of Violation.
4.
It is department policy to offer admitted students four-year packages
contingent upon timely progress. Support will be equivalent in monetary terms
to a 50% TAship on the assistant level. The package may consist of fellowships,
grants, unrestricted aid, research assistantships, teaching assistantships, or
any combination of the above. Most favorable consideration for further funding
shall be given to students who maintain normative progress beyond advancement
to candidacy.
5.
MA reading lists in literature and linguistics shall be provided each academic
year to all entering graduate students and be reviewed in a timely manner.
6.
25% TAships for scheduled language courses shall be used only in case of
emergency funding needs.
7.
Every faculty member shall teach at least one undergraduate course a year.
8.
A pro-seminar shall be reinstated as required course for all first-year
students.
9.
The MSO of the Kinsey Humanities Group shall be present at faculty meetings.
10.
Every graduate student and faculty member shall receive keys to the Slavic
Reading Room.
11.
Students may expect timely responses to the dissertation or individual chapters
from their committees, that is, generally within one month of submission.
12.
Non-native progress towards advanced degrees shall be defined as follows: six
academic quarters from the onset of graduate study to the awarding of the MA
degree; six academic quarters from the awarding of the MA degree to advancement
to candidacy; six academic quarters from advancement to candidacy to the
completion of the dissertation.
13.
Each spring the Support Coordinators shall calculate and make public to faculty
and students the kinds and amounts of student funding it has or recommends for
distribution, and each fall the Support Coordinators shall calculate and make
public the number of students supported from each category.
14.
Students shall submit a Self Evaluation to the support coordinators by 15 March
including 1) a list of all courses taken in graduate school together with the
grades received, 2) self-assessment of progress to date and information on
circumstances affecting progress, 3) talks given, papers published, etc., 4)
prospects for coming year(s).
15.
The Department shall appoint two faculty members, one in linguistics and one in
literature, as recruitment officers.
Changes
in the Graduate Program
1.
The Department shall institute an optional sub-specialty at the PhD level
consisting of at least four courses selected by the student and approved by the
graduate adviser. The courses will come from graduate offerings in one or more
UCLA departments or programs (Anthropology, Applied Linguistics, Art History,
Classics, Comparative Literature, English, Film, Folklore and Mythology,
French, Germanic, History, Indo-European Studies, language and literature
departments [French, Germanic, etc.], Linguistics, Music, Philosophy,
Psychology, Theater, Women's Studies) and including courses from within the
Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures (students in linguistics
choosing from courses in literature and students in literature choosing from
courses in linguistics).
2.
A pro-seminar, consisting of 2-4 units, shall be reinstated as a required
course for the MA.
3.
Proficiency in either French or German shall be required for the MA.
Proficiency must be demonstrated by passing a departmental translation
examination. Although the examination may be deferred until after the MA
examinations, the degree will not be awarded until it has been passed. Students
are therefore urged to demonstrate proficiency as soon as possible after
matriculation.
4.
Students shall be given written notice of the results of the MA and PhD examination
one hour after the conclusion of the oral portion of the examination and a
written evaluation of their performance within one week.
5.
Students may request MA or PhD examinations at the beginning of the academic
year as well as at the end of each academic quarter.
6.
The qualifying paper shall be abolished.
7.
Proficiency in both French and German shall be required for the PhD.
Proficiency in one of the languages will have been formally tested prior to the
awarding of the MA. Proficiency in the second is to be demonstrated by the
inclusion of texts in that language on the bibliographies prepared for the PhD
examinations and the demonstration of familiarity with said texts in the
written and/or oral portions of the PhD examinations.
Changes
in the Linguistics Program
1.
The catalogue text describing the PhD requirements in Slavic linguistics shall
be modified as follows: Students in linguistics take two three-hour written
examinations. In the first of these THE STUDENT IS EXAMINED IN THE GENERAL AREA
OF THE PROPOSED DISSERTATION RESEARCH, in the other, in comparative Slavic
linguistics, the history of Russian and the history and structure of a second
Slavic language.
Changes
in the Literature Program
1.
Russian 215 (Contemporary Russian Literature) shall be renumbered Russian 213B
and made an MA requirement.
2.
The MA written examination shall consist of three 2-hour examinations, spaced
one day apart over the course of a week, the first devoted to medieval and eighteenth-century
Russian literature, the second to nineteenth-century Russian literature, and
the third to twentieth-century Russian literature.
3.
The MA oral examination shall be open to observation by faculty members other
than those constituting the examination committee should the examinee so
desire.
4.
Russian 220A (Structure of Modem Russian: Phonology and Morphology) and Russian
204 (Introduction to the History of Modem Russian) and Russian 219 (Movements
and Genres in Russian Literature) shall be eliminated as MA requirements for
students specializing in Russian literature; Russian 220A and Russian 204 shall
be added to the PhD requirements.
5.
The number of seminars required for the PhD shall be reduced from 4 to 3.
6.
The PhD written examination shall consist of seven one-hour examinations,
spaced over the course of two weeks,
devoted
to topics distributed as follows:
a.
the medieval period
b.
the eighteenth century
c.
the nineteenth century
d.
the twentieth century
e.
literary theory
f.
a second Slavic literature
g.
the provisional dissertation topic
The
specific topics and the accompanying bibliographies shall be developed by the
student in consultation with and the approval of the members of the examination
committee.
7. A course will be developed in which students at the dissertation stage are required to give regular reports on the progress of their research. The course may be conflated with regular meetings of the literary faculty devoted to the discussion of ongoing faculty research.
Section 1 | Section 2 | Section 3 | Section 4a | Section 4b | Section 4c | Section 4d | Section 4e | Section 4f | Section 4g
| Section 4h | Section 4i | Section 5 | Section 6 | Section 7 | Section 8 |