What is I-O?

SIOP would like to more fully support student involvement in our existing organization but should do so considering a few important constraints. First, SIOP operates on a tight budget and has to consider carefully any proposals with financial implications such as this one. Some of the suggestions in the proposal would lead to increases in student dues and student conference registration feessomething we would not like to do at this time. Second, SIOP guards its reputation very carefully and is mindful of members diverse interests. Thus, we move slowly on change initiativeswe think through all possible problems first (e.g., offensive remarks on listserves). Third, any steps that SIOP takes to better serve its student members must also be supported by SIOPs full members (e.g., faculty) and we need to assess that support. Given these constraints, the Executive Committee plans to undertake the following steps to further student involvement in SIOP. 

Student Voice

Students do not have a formal voice mechanism within SIOP, and such a mechanism might be helpful for a number of reasons (e.g., input on education and training issues). To enhance student voice, the Executive Committee has decided that one student representative be placed on these SIOP committees: Education and Training, Placement, APA Program, SIOP Program, the Local Arrangements subcommittee of the SIOP Conference Committee, TIP (note that there already are student columnists for TIP), and Electronic Communications. As with all other committee placements, selection of these student representatives would be made by the committee chair from among those who self-nominate for the committee. Modifications will be made to the self-nomination form that regularly appears in TIP and online to include a section for student members and to note the relevant committees for which they can self-nominate. Self-nominations would be restricted to students in their 3^rd or 4^th year of a doctoral program. As with other committee members, students would serve from April to April. Note that, as with any committee member, it would be up to the discretion of the chair of each committee to determine in what capacities the student representative would best be involved in committee activities. For example, the student representative to the Program Committee would likely serve in an advising role regarding invited program content (e.g., topics for tutorials) but would not serve as a reviewer. Also, note that only one of the self-nominees would be selected to sit on each committee.

Second, the Executive Committee will plan that a student conversation hour with some subset of Executive committee members to be held at the annual conference regularly as a good mechanism for face-to-face information exchange.

The Executive Committee determined that the suggestions in the Student Proposal regarding student elections and attendance at the Executive Committee meetings were not viable ones. First, the by-laws prohibit student affiliates from voting. Therefore, a by-laws amendment would be required to allow for an election. This would mean that current voting members would be the ones to decide whether students would be allowed to vote. An amendment simply allowing voting privileges is unlikely to pass; the amendment would probably need to be restricted to voting only for a student representative and not on other issues. Further, any election of a student representative would currently be open to voting by all members. Also, it is important to note that the category of student affiliate includes both undergraduates and graduate students. Both would be eligible to vote. To monitor an election by only a portion of the membership on only certain issues was seen as a costly proposition. Finally, given that students do not necessarily know many other students, and that we did not see a groundswell of interest from the students in elections, we feel the self-nomination process for serving on committees will work well.

Another suggestion from the proposal that was given serious consideration but rejected was to have student representatives attend the Executive Committee meetings. An informal survey of over 50 members (in addition to the opinions of the 40 something Executive Committee members) indicated that the vast majority thought that there would be no real value to a student attending these meetings, that student time would be best be spent on other professional advancement activities, and that the cost would not be worth it for a token gesture. Students can have much more influence via placement on key committees. 

Networking Among Students and With Members

SIOP should encourage the exchange of professional information among students and between students and members. This exchange can and should take place via the same mechanisms that members use to network. SIOP has already included students in the directory as was suggested in the proposal, although this does substantially increase the cost of producing the directory.

The Executive Committee also felt that student-to-student interaction in conference settings already exists. The IOOB graduate student conference has been around for more than 15 years and has served as a wonderful means for students to connect with other students. SIOP has always been a sponsor of the conference and will continue to do so. SIOPs doctoral consortium also serves a networking function, although it is limited to a small number of students.

The proposal suggested creating other settings at the SIOP conference for student networking. The Executive Committee felt that students would view a conference social hour as too costly and suggested that Local Arrangements (with a student representative) investigate local options for a place for students to congregate and network at reasonable prices.

SIOPs electronic communications committee is currently examining the pros and cons of setting up bulletin boards, chat rooms, and listserves. The proposal suggests a separate means of electronic communication just for students, and we are in contact with APA regarding establishing a SIOP student-only listserve. Because there are fiscal issues and policy issues associated with a student-only listserve, as well as other means of electronic communication, their implementation may not occur for several months. However, the plans for implementation are underway. 

Providing Resources to Prospective and New Graduate Students

SIOP already does an excellent job of providing resources to prospective and new graduate students. Members may not be aware of the amount of time the administrative office spends in communication with potential students and current student affiliatesit comprises much more of the requests for information than from any other group! In response to some issues raised in the proposal, we offer the following:

The graduate program directory has been updated and is online.

The type of information provided in the directory is sufficient. We feel it is the responsibility of individual programs to market themselves on their websites and do not feel that SIOP should be providing student contacts, advice, and so forth. SIOP already advises prospective students on types of information it would be helpful to ask. Education and Training has developed a short information section that is on the web page for individuals interested in pursuing a degree in I-O. Suggestions for improvements are welcome. 

Other Suggestions

The proposal suggested arranging more hotel space for students. The July 2000 TIP contained an article from Ron Johnson regarding hotel arrangements that indicates why this is not something SIOP can do.

In summary, we feel the proposal raised a number of significant issues that SIOP can and should address. We have noted which suggestions we plan to implement, which were deemed infeasible, and which we are investigating further. SIOP welcomes the input and suggestions of all members, and the Executive Committee strives to turn good ideas into action whenever it is practically and economically feasible, and in the best interests of the membership.