A list of websites that have been suggested for procrastination purposes can be found below. Please feel free to post your own. Please, no porn.
http://gofugyourself.celebuzz.com/
duh : http://www.facebook.com/home.php
http://www.fun-facts.com/items/type/fun-facts
http://www.strangefacts.com/index.html
http://www.dumbspot.com/?gatherer_id=100332&gclid=CIPq4rvHrpoCFRYpFQodQm8DcA
Candidate information below:
Vote here
Click here to see who MiddBlog endorsed and feel free to leave your own endoresment as a comment. No hating the other candidates, please. Thank you
* I have only posted information from candidates who have sent it to me. Candidates who are not listed have not sent me information. This is not a personal endorsement of any candidate.
COMMUNITY COUNCIL CHAIR:
SGA PRESIDENT:
Middlebury College (administration and a committee) has decided to enforce a parking fee starting the 2009-2010 academic year. Details here.
Parking fee of $50/ semester, $100/ year, $25/ language school.
The revenue from this new fee is predicted to be around $100, ooo. The suggested uses of this fee are: buying carbon off-sets, enhancing MiddRides and zipcars, and subsidising parking lot maintenance (plowing, etc.)
How do you want the revenue from these fees divided? Which of these issues are most/least important? Your suggestions will be directly represented during the SGA vote on this topic.
Have you been to 51 Main? How do you think the space has been used? How do you think it can be better used? What are your ideas to increase 51 Main’s profits and sustainability?
Disclaimers SGA (I) is not responsible for these storage options. The purpose of this post is to allow a forum for students to coordinate storage options for next years. Post your request as a comment….(ex. Going abroad for a year, need to share space, contact me at Middkid@middlebury.edu) or something like that
Storage options:
The School - I think more specifically, a barn.
Directions:
1. Go to this site: https://images.jostens.com?user=1163159&pw=MiddPhoto
2. Type in the following information:
Login – 1163159
Password – MiddPhoto
PLEASE title your photo with :
Below are the proposed changes to the Honor Code. This proposal differs from the original proposal by the Honor Code Review Committee and the SGA feels that the new solution is more in line with what students want. In order for this proposal (along with the other suggestions of the HCRC, see websites for details) to be passed, 2/3 of the student body has to approve the changes in a school wide vote. More information to come….
Constitutional Changes Article II: Examination Procedure
b. No proctors will be present during examinations, unless specific authorization has been given by the Dean of the College.
c. The Dean of the College may grant an instructor permission to proctor an examination in his or her course when the instructor has communicated to the Dean of the College that she or he has a concern that students will cheat in examinations in the course. Authorization will apply to the remainder of the semester.
i) Communication of concern may take the form of an e-mail to the Dean of the College.
ii) Instructors who have concerns about cheating and wish to proctor must make a formal announcement to the class both in class and in e-mail form at least 24 hours prior to the examination. The Dean of the College must be copied on the announcement e-mail.
iii) Students may register complaints or concerns about the method of proctoring with the Dean of the College. d. When an instructor’s presence in the exam is required because of the nature of the exam (e.g. slides), the instructor should receive permission from the Dean of the College and notify the class in advance. e. keep as is; do not strike. f. keep as is; do not strike.
A yard/garage/tag/whatever sale to sell some crap before storing or sending it home. Hypothetically it would be in some social place like McCullough or Kenyon and would be open to the community….
Any thoughts?
This is one of the proposed revisions to the Honor Code Review’s suggestions (HCRC Article III Revisions Bill.) It passed in a straw poll 6 to 5, but has not come to a formal vote. It will be proposed if the current Honor Code Revisions do not gain a 2/3 approval from students in the spring….
Student Government Association Senate
11 March 2009
HCRC ARTICLE III REVISIONS BILL
Sponsored by Roger Perreault ‘09
WHEREAS the 2008-2009 Honor Code Review Committee has expressed a desire for changes to be made to the judicial process without the logistical difficulties associated with a campus-wide vote,
WHEREAS the proposed revisions to Article IIIc cede all student votes upon matters relating to the Judicial Process by placing control over the judicial process in the College Handbook, material for which the students have no vote,
WHEREAS students are the parties that undergo the judicial process, and should thus not waive their right to vote on the judicial process simply for matters of bureaucratic expediency,
WHEREAS the official constitution describing a policy rather than a second, arbitrarily chosen document should contain relevant information about that policy,
WHEREAS students’ voices can easily be incorporated into the academic judicial board process through currently available means,
BE IT RESOLVED
1.)
That the proposed HCRC Article IIIc. amendment:
“Alleged violations will be handled according to the academic disciplinary policies of the current Middlebury College Handbook. The Academic Judicial Board will schedule a hearing for the accused. The accused will be allowed to introduce evidence or witnesses in his or her defense. The presence of the accuser in person is required at the hearing.”
Be altered to read:
“Alleged violations will be handled according to the academic disciplinary policies of the current Middlebury College Handbook, pending approval of a 2/3 majority in favor of amendment of 2/3 voting members of the present Student Government Association Senate. The Academic Judicial Board will schedule a hearing for the accused. The accused will be allowed to introduce evidence or witnesses in his or her defense. The presence of the accuser in person is required at the hearing.”
2.)
That all the current information related to the academic judicial process section of the College Handbook be entered into the Honor Code and that all discrepancies between College Handbook policy and Honor Code policy be resolved.
3.)
That the new revisions to the Honor Code and the revised amendment to Article IIIc contained in this Bill be presented in place of the HCRC language to the student body vote.
This is the second proposed revision to the revisons proposed by the HCRC to Article II about proctoring. This is confusing so if you want info e-mail me….
Student Government Association Senate
11 March 2009
Sponsored by Ethan Schmertzler ‘12
WHEREAS the 2008-2009 Honor Code Review Committee has expressed a desire for changes to be made to the judicial process without the logistical difficulties associated with a campus-wide vote,
WHEREAS the proposed revisions to Article II permit professors to henceforth proctor exams without any measure of protection for the student body,
WHEREAS students are the primary party affected by the proctoring of exams,
WHEREAS the faculty have expressed their firm belief that there will be no cause for students to feel that faculty are abusing their right to proctor exams in a productive environment that does not unduly inhibit students from effectively taking exams,
BE IT RESOLVED
1.)
That the proposed HCRC Article II. amendment:
a. Only authorized materials may be used during an examination.
b. No proctors will be present during examinations, unless specific authorization has been given by the Academic Judicial Board.
c. The Academic Judicial Board may grant an instructor permission to proctor an examination in his or her course when the instructor has demonstrated to the board that there is a reasonable suspicion that there are students cheating in examinations in the course. Authorization will apply only to a single examination and must be renewed in every case by the same procedure.
d. When an instructor’s presence in the exam is required because of the nature of the exam (e.g., slides), the instructor should receive permission from the administrative co-chair of the Academic Judicial Board and notify the class in advance.
e. The instructor will remain in the examination room for no more than 15 minutes after the start of an examination. He or she may return during the examination to check on any further problems that students may have with examination questions or general procedure, only if he or she announces his or her intention to do so at the beginning of the examination.
(b) Instructors will remain in the general area for questions for the duration of the examination period.
f. (c) During the examination each student will have complete freedom of action providing he or she does not interfere with the work of others. Except in the case of take-home examinations, no examination papers will be taken from the room except to consult with the instructor.
Be altered to read:
a. Only authorized materials may be used during an examination.
b. No proctors will be present during examinations, unless specific authorization has been given by the Academic Judicial Board.
c. The Academic Judicial Board may grant an instructor permission to proctor an examination in his or her course when the instructor has demonstrated to the board that there is a reasonable suspicion that there are students cheating in examinations in the course. Authorization will apply only to a single examination and must be renewed in every case by the same procedure.
d. When an instructor’s presence in the exam is required because of the nature of the exam (e.g., slides), the instructor should receive permission from the administrative co-chair of the Academic Judicial Board and notify the class in advance.
e. The instructor will remain in the examination room for no more than 15 minutes after the start of an examination. He or she may return during the examination to check on any further problems that students may have with examination questions or general procedure, only if he or she announces his or her intention to do so at the beginning of the examination.
(b) Instructors will remain in the general area for questions for the duration of the examination period.
f. (c) During the examination each student will have complete freedom of action providing he or she does not interfere with the work of others. Except in the case of take-home examinations, no examination papers will be taken from the room except to consult with the instructor.
(d) The Academic Judicial Officer shall hear any reasonable concerns that students may have if students feel that actions by the instructor have created an environment that inhibits a student’s examination ability. The Academic Judicial Officer will work to resolve legitimate problems.
