The original version of this article contained an error and has been changed. See the bottom of the article for additional information.
UCLA’s graduate students will have the chance this week to speak out on controversial changes to the university’s leave of absence policy and to approve new funding to graduate-specific resources on campus.
But change may only materialize during this week’s Graduate Student Association elections if the percentage of voters is great enough to demand notice from the UCLA administration.
With two referendums that hold the potential to directly impact the academic and personal lives of graduate students, the voice of the constituency will hold special importance in this election. One referendum proposes a graduate student fee hike to fund the Graduate Writing Center and the other seeks to gauge student support of UCLA’s new leave of absence policy.
But the Graduate Student Association acts as an advisory body, and will only be successful in its attempts to convey the opinions of graduate students to campus administration if voter turnout is sufficient to pass or reject the referendum.
If the election fails to draw at least 10 percent of graduate students, the referendum will be automatically thrown out.
Objectively, 10 percent represents a miniscule number of the graduate student body. For the advisory referendum to carry real heft, graduate students need to come out to vote in greater number. A majority vote, either in support or opposition to the referendums, from a more significant percentage of the student body would allow GSA to work more effectively on their behalf.
In 2011, voter turnout was a dismal 4.8 percent. Last year’s voter turnout was nearly double this figure, at 8.43 percent, but still fell short of the necessary 10 percent minimum.
Earlier this year, graduate students were quite vocal in their protest over changes to the university’s leave of absence policy. In order to convey the reported dismay over the revised standards, graduate students must come out in full force to give weight to the advisory referendum.
The prior leave of absence policy allowed for graduate students to take up to six quarters of leave for various reasons including research, dissertation writing, familial obligations and medical emergencies.
In order to bring UCLA into compliance with the University of California Office of the President’s policies and in line with other UC campuses, the previous leave of absence policy was rewritten to allow for three quarters of leave. The new policy struck down dissertation writing and exam preparation as valid reasons for taking a leave, although students can petition for additional quarters off for exceptional circumstances such as medical emergency, military service or familial crisis.
The referendum could provide an entry point to a long process of initiating change that would benefit a large, visible group on campus.
Any changes brought about by the referendum must go through the UCLA Academic Senate, whose faculty members could be inspired to propose changes if the graduate students express desire to change policy through the referendum, said Robin Garrell, vice provost for graduate education and dean of the UCLA Graduate Division.
The Graduate Students Association and the graduate students that make up its constituency must take it upon themselves to increase participation in the election.
Daniel Goodman, the commissioner of elections for GSA, said that last year’s increase in voter turnout was likely due to the inclusion of a referendum that more students cared about as well as increased efforts to encourage voting.
This year, two key referendums have made their way on the ballot, and GSA has strengthened efforts to bring in voters. This might be enough inspiration to encourage a 10 percent turnout.
GSA sends emails, posts Facebook events and hosts programs to foster voter participation. Last year, an event called “Grad Bar” presented an opportunity for candidates and those concerned with referendums to speak directly with graduate students while enjoying dinner and drinks, Goodman said.
But emails and Facebook events are easily lost in inboxes flooded with other important messages, and information booths are limited in their reach because of graduate students’ varying locations, which are often restricted to their respective departments.
During this week’s election, GSA will establish information booths three days during the election that will have voting stations, snacks and explanations of the candidates and referendums on the ballots, Goodman added. GSA’s efforts to increase interest in voting are admirable and important, but these approaches have failed to target the graduate student body in an effective manner.
Still, GSA can’t be held entirely responsible for voter apathy. Ultimately, it is the graduate students themselves who need to speak out on their own behalf.
With their family lives, careers and other issues demanding students’ time and attention, a GSA election may seem like an unimportant and unnecessary chore. However, the issues that GSA tackles often spill over into their family lives and careers. Maintaining a strong point of contact with the administration through GSA has a broad impact on the lives of graduate students.
If graduate students want their voice to have an impact on policies that affect them, they need to begin showing a collective desire for that change.