Memory Adjustment Commission meeting of October 7
The meeting took place at the headquarters of the CBC Bulnes, 18 to 20 hours.
Present: Hector Löbbe, Paul Rabey, Ariel Eidelman, Mariela Diaz, Eduardo Weisz, Joaquín Farina, Eduardo Glavich and Mariana Cordoba.
First, they discussed the possibility of submitting a note to the direction in which CBC was requested to convene the first meeting of the Advisory Commission to develop Aide a regulation.
was established that had to agree to this on CD. See reports of CD in http://agdciclobasicocomun.blogspot.com/
Discussion FFyL Regulations for the purpose of developing a regulation for the CBC itself
General issues were discussed whether a regulation corresponds to an introduction calling attention to the specificities of the CBC. It was resolved that were written at the end, once they were the articles, the "Recitals" on the specific teaching of the CBC, and on the problematic of the categories of students and graduate students in the Academic Unit.
Concerning the Interdepartmental Board, they discussed the possible composition of the faculty student, taking into account the Resolution 2036.
is said about the experiences of departmental boards and the Interdepartmental Board 97 years.
specific issues discussed on some of the news article 13
As ag)
resurfaced discussion about the possibility of research (not) offered by the CBC as an academic unit. As ah
)
Assess whether you need to submit Aides also (like the JTPs) plan class, since, in fact, serve the same functions, or whether, on the contrary, it would be better to retain the difference in order to defend the idea that JTP should have other roles, such as that of coordinating committees. The idea is to maintain this position with the aim, among others, to respond to popular demands from 1 to 1 which, incidentally, is used by the management of CBC as an argument against the requirement of high and low guild.
Article 14 was discussed about whether to include in the article Aides II with a period of X years for graduation, once they enter into teaching.
Article 15 was discussed on the possibility that the regulation will grant a longer period for submission of entries to the contest who were already in office will be stated, but there was no agreement on establishing this difference.
Article 16 As for those who may object to the candidates registered for the contest within 10 days after the close of registration, there was discussion about who / it can present these challenges. If they must be among those who can do the students and graduates, or not. There was discussion about whether to specify associations' guilds, and on eliminating professional societies between those who may object to the applicants.
Title 3. Of the Evaluation Committees.
was discussed, in general, about the mechanisms through which they would select the evaluators.
For students, the options discussed were to be voted on in committee meetings open, via FUBA via Boards of Directors of the races, or by the Supreme Council.
Article 27. Composition of Evaluation Committees.
Res 2087 imposes restrictions on the possible creation. One option being discussed is that instead of graduate assistants were proposed (the proposed auxiliary aides suggesting they would be first and second, so as to ensure so, greater presence estudiantil).
Art. 31
Los jurados que se encontraran en algunas de las causales de excusación están obligados a excusarse de intervenir en el concurso. Agregar “siendo previamente informados de quiénes son los aspirantes al cargo”.
Art. 32
Se aclaró que siempre que se hace referencia a plazos, la referencia es a días hábiles y no corridos.
Art. 36
En cuanto al quórum de las comisiones evaluadoras, de discutió acerca de evitar la posibilidad de sesionar sólo por profesores.
La idea es que también se requiera la presencia de auxiliares (si “sale bien” lo discutido respecto del Art. 27, se garantizaría de este modo student's presence).
The idea is that the amount exceeds the quorum required by Resolution 2036.
Article 40 was discussed on the evidence of public opposition is required only in the case of entrance examinations.
was discussion about who should publish the minimum and the last two programs of matter whose charges are competing, so that candidates for office can access it.
Section 41 that was discussed about updating records submitted by the candidates one or two weeks before the contest takes place. Article 42
was discussed about removing the requirement for a minimum score in the background to access test opposition.
The meeting took place at the headquarters of the CBC Bulnes, 18 to 20 hours.
Present: Hector Löbbe, Paul Rabey, Ariel Eidelman, Mariela Diaz, Eduardo Weisz, Joaquín Farina, Eduardo Glavich and Mariana Cordoba.
First, they discussed the possibility of submitting a note to the direction in which CBC was requested to convene the first meeting of the Advisory Commission to develop Aide a regulation.
was established that had to agree to this on CD. See reports of CD in http://agdciclobasicocomun.blogspot.com/
Discussion FFyL Regulations for the purpose of developing a regulation for the CBC itself
General issues were discussed whether a regulation corresponds to an introduction calling attention to the specificities of the CBC. It was resolved that were written at the end, once they were the articles, the "Recitals" on the specific teaching of the CBC, and on the problematic of the categories of students and graduate students in the Academic Unit.
Concerning the Interdepartmental Board, they discussed the possible composition of the faculty student, taking into account the Resolution 2036.
is said about the experiences of departmental boards and the Interdepartmental Board 97 years.
specific issues discussed on some of the news article 13
As ag)
resurfaced discussion about the possibility of research (not) offered by the CBC as an academic unit. As ah
)
Assess whether you need to submit Aides also (like the JTPs) plan class, since, in fact, serve the same functions, or whether, on the contrary, it would be better to retain the difference in order to defend the idea that JTP should have other roles, such as that of coordinating committees. The idea is to maintain this position with the aim, among others, to respond to popular demands from 1 to 1 which, incidentally, is used by the management of CBC as an argument against the requirement of high and low guild.
Article 14 was discussed about whether to include in the article Aides II with a period of X years for graduation, once they enter into teaching.
Article 15 was discussed on the possibility that the regulation will grant a longer period for submission of entries to the contest who were already in office will be stated, but there was no agreement on establishing this difference.
Article 16 As for those who may object to the candidates registered for the contest within 10 days after the close of registration, there was discussion about who / it can present these challenges. If they must be among those who can do the students and graduates, or not. There was discussion about whether to specify associations' guilds, and on eliminating professional societies between those who may object to the applicants.
Title 3. Of the Evaluation Committees.
was discussed, in general, about the mechanisms through which they would select the evaluators.
For students, the options discussed were to be voted on in committee meetings open, via FUBA via Boards of Directors of the races, or by the Supreme Council.
Article 27. Composition of Evaluation Committees.
Res 2087 imposes restrictions on the possible creation. One option being discussed is that instead of graduate assistants were proposed (the proposed auxiliary aides suggesting they would be first and second, so as to ensure so, greater presence estudiantil).
Art. 31
Los jurados que se encontraran en algunas de las causales de excusación están obligados a excusarse de intervenir en el concurso. Agregar “siendo previamente informados de quiénes son los aspirantes al cargo”.
Art. 32
Se aclaró que siempre que se hace referencia a plazos, la referencia es a días hábiles y no corridos.
Art. 36
En cuanto al quórum de las comisiones evaluadoras, de discutió acerca de evitar la posibilidad de sesionar sólo por profesores.
La idea es que también se requiera la presencia de auxiliares (si “sale bien” lo discutido respecto del Art. 27, se garantizaría de este modo student's presence).
The idea is that the amount exceeds the quorum required by Resolution 2036.
Article 40 was discussed on the evidence of public opposition is required only in the case of entrance examinations.
was discussion about who should publish the minimum and the last two programs of matter whose charges are competing, so that candidates for office can access it.
Section 41 that was discussed about updating records submitted by the candidates one or two weeks before the contest takes place. Article 42
was discussed about removing the requirement for a minimum score in the background to access test opposition.
0 comments:
Post a Comment