<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Queensboro Community College Academic Senate Takes On Pathways Dispute</title>
	<atom:link href="http://studentactivism.net/2012/10/10/qcc-pathways-a/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://studentactivism.net/2012/10/10/qcc-pathways-a/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 23:17:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Austin Smith</title>
		<link>http://studentactivism.net/2012/10/10/qcc-pathways-a/#comment-56638</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Austin Smith]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 22:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://studentactivism.net/?p=8641#comment-56638</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great reporting on this key battleground in the international student movement. The same legal issue is at the core of both the QCC English department&#039;s struggle, and objections to the process by which Pathways was passed by the Chancellor &amp; CUNY BOT: NYS Education Law gives primary responsibility to the University and College Faculty Senates in formulating and recommending academic and curricular policy, full stop. The various senates (students included) are the recognized representatives of their constituencies. Additionally, case law has recognized the CUNY BOT, University and College Senates as de facto legislative bodies, their powers devolved from the NYS Legislature. Therefore, the Pathways steering committee of Chancellor&#039;s appointees was illegitimate under black-letter law, since the faculty, students, and staff participants were not selected by the relevant University Senates. The same holds true at the college level at QCC. It&#039;s beyond bad policy, it&#039;s illegal. Not much of the PSC&#039;s case against Pathways is public, but one would think an injunction against implementation would be reasonable. This is all tragic, as intra-CUNY articulation reform is sorely needed, and a collegial process through appropriate shared governance bodies was not impossible, just substantially longer. It would, however, have yielded sounder policy, and left the various stake-holders relatively satisfied, rather than embroiling the entire CUNY professoriate in this needless acrimony. Keep up the fight, keep up the coverage!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great reporting on this key battleground in the international student movement. The same legal issue is at the core of both the QCC English department&#8217;s struggle, and objections to the process by which Pathways was passed by the Chancellor &amp; CUNY BOT: NYS Education Law gives primary responsibility to the University and College Faculty Senates in formulating and recommending academic and curricular policy, full stop. The various senates (students included) are the recognized representatives of their constituencies. Additionally, case law has recognized the CUNY BOT, University and College Senates as de facto legislative bodies, their powers devolved from the NYS Legislature. Therefore, the Pathways steering committee of Chancellor&#8217;s appointees was illegitimate under black-letter law, since the faculty, students, and staff participants were not selected by the relevant University Senates. The same holds true at the college level at QCC. It&#8217;s beyond bad policy, it&#8217;s illegal. Not much of the PSC&#8217;s case against Pathways is public, but one would think an injunction against implementation would be reasonable. This is all tragic, as intra-CUNY articulation reform is sorely needed, and a collegial process through appropriate shared governance bodies was not impossible, just substantially longer. It would, however, have yielded sounder policy, and left the various stake-holders relatively satisfied, rather than embroiling the entire CUNY professoriate in this needless acrimony. Keep up the fight, keep up the coverage!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
