1/25: I joined the Leadership Round Table in my capacities as Internal ghU Coordinator and

GrOW Team Member for GlobeMed, and Tribunal Senator for CEAS. Looking ahead, I hope to use this experience to build connections with other students that are highly involved on campus, and to learn strategies that will make my organisations more effective while honing my leadership skills. OVer the course of the programme, I hope to discuss topics such as 'Recruiting Students', 'Inter-org Collaboration', and 'Effective Leadership Transitions'. 

​

2/09: Our first meeting topic was Freshmen Engagement. Student orgs are facing the unique

challenge of recruiting and retaining students who have been online for their entire college experience. At this point, with a semester of virtual engagement under our belts, there were some great ideas about using different features of remote meeting software. The GlobeMed Community Norms model seemed especially popular: making reactions, raising hands, private messaging, and renaming yourself part of expected group conduct creates a set of rules that allow everyone to participate equitably. Effective Breakout Room technique was a major topic, there is a fine line to walk between over-structuring and under-facilitating discussion but they are a great tool to attempt to replicate the organic interactions that would happen in an in-person meeting.

​

2/22: This week we discussed Mental Health Policies at UC. The main problem with access to

mental health resources on campus seems to be one of coordination. There are many resources that are available to students, although there could always be more, but they are poorly advertised and under-utilised. SAB created a mental health awareness training programme for RSOs that does a good job of laying out the various resources available to students, but that still requires a student to be connected to CampusLINK and aware of where the information is. Our student body could really benefit from a normalisation of conversations about mental health, particularly as everyone is having a hard time adapting to our new online format. 

​

3/09: Our presentation this week touched on Managing Projects Virtually, giving both

examples of tools that can be used and a more general understanding of how to transition a student org to an online environment. There was an interesting question of what will be carry-over once we're allowed to meet in-person again. I definitely think the increased accessibility of online meetings is a major benefit, as well as the flexibility of being able to "meet" on very short notice. On the other hand, expectations for availability have become somewhat unrealistic, this is in part due to a lack of accountability to online spaces and how easy it can be to just let responsibilities fall by the wayside, but in a larger sense there is more entitlement to people's time now that commuting isn't a problem. Intentional communication and maintaining realistic expectations will be important for continued success with virtual orgs. 

​

3/22: We spoke this week on Elections and Transitioning Leadership, timely subjects as we

come to the end of the of the Spring semester. My presentation focused on different election formats, GlobeMed and Tribunal both have a range of options for different positions and it was interesting to think about how the format reflects the responsibilities of each role. A point was raised about transitioning out of a role which I haven't heard much conversation about. Some of our leaders this year have left very big shoes to fill and will also still be involved in the org in a reduced capacity in the future. This could create an interesting power dynamic, especially as the incoming leaders are adjusting to their new roles. 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

4/05: Our final presentation was on creating a culture of Diversity and Inclusion in student

spaces on campus. Part of the problem with tackling this issue is that too often it is reduced to buzzwords and performative activism. Doing the work of addressing systemic barriers to D&I is hard, not just to accomplish, but also just to recognise what needs to be done. So much emphasis is placed on centering the voices of people belonging to marginalised communities, but that is a challenging role to be placed in and the pressure of representing your entire group is often not what most students signed up for. It was interesting to hear how other student groups have been tackling these challenges and I look forward to putting some of their ideas in practice in my own orgs in the future. 

​