Editor’s note: The doctoral candidate quoted in the article is speaking independently and not on behalf of the University or the Graduate Student Assembly.
The Graduate Student Assembly advocated for a resolution to centralize graduate student representation across student governance organizations at the Jan. 13 Student Government meeting.
GSA President David Spicer said at the meeting that he wishes to make GSA the home for UT’s graduate student population with more comprehensive representation of their issues. Last semester, the Office of the Dean of Students blocked multiple GSA resolutions about the implementation of Texas Senate Bill 37 and the potential consolidation of the College of Liberal Arts.
According to the resolution, these actions were blocked due to GSA’s Constitution, which limits the organization to issues “unique to graduate students,” whereas the Student Government Constitution covers all students.
Right now, Student Government has six graduate student representative positions, but the resolution calls on SG to cede all graduate representation to GSA, which would require changing the Institutional Rules and Student Government constitution. According to the resolution, GSA will propose an amendment for the University’s consideration by the end of the semester.
“GSA needs the latitude to address the graduate-specific concerns over maybe a wider community issue,” said Spicer, a second-year doctoral candidate in Higher Education and Leadership. “This isn’t to say that there shouldn’t be any relationship with undergraduates … this is mostly trying to help with some of those jurisdiction issues that I think have been confusing for student leaders and … a lot of our advisors as well.”
Anthony Nguyen, Speaker of the Assembly for SG, said he agrees with Spicer on student advocacy, but the resolution won’t solve the problems it aims to address.
“The resolutions that have been having trouble passing through are not because of Student Government’s existence and the fact that we have graduate representation,” said Nguyen, a management junior. “It is because of the school’s positioning regarding politics.”
Nguyen said this is due to institutional neutrality and restrictions from Senate Bill 17, which prohibits diversity, equity and inclusion activities and language from sponsored student organizations, like SG and GSA.
If SG tried to cover the same issues as GSA, they would get struck down, too, Nguyen said. For example, during his freshman year on SG, Nguyen said SG faced trouble talking about the Multicultural Engagement Center closing down and other political issues.
Nguyen also said the issue GSA faces is a lack of working relationships with the University and various initiatives that SG and the Senate of College Councils have.
“GSA should have a place in the room, … but they haven’t been focused on that,” Nguyen said. “They don’t have standing meetings with a lot of people that (SG) people have standing meetings with. That is a fairly big issue, because then whenever you depersonalize the process of student advocacy, it just becomes the institution.”
