At the last meeting I asked the question, 'What's the goal of the
graduate education program?'  After the initial, half-joking
response, 'To pass the qual' (which nicely illustrates a common view
of the  qual as an end in and of itself, but that's another story),
the serious answer was given as something like 'To give the student
a broad background in contemporary astronomy.'  This was the answer
I expected, and led to my real question, which was 'Are we doing this
in the most effective way?'  I asked this question because I believe
there is a strong feeling among the grad students that we are not.

One complaint that has been made by grad students recently is that
there is no obvious (to us) cohesiveness to the curriculum.  The
classes appear to be merely individual modules insulated from each
other, rather than components of a larger structure.  This is
caused by matters such as material repeated in multiple classes
(an unavoidable occurrence, and probably not a major problem) and
its mirror image, topics not being covered because multiple
professors think it was already covered in another class.

This has been interpreted as being a call for some sort of mandatory
minimum syllabus for each class, presumably decided by a committee
rather than individual instructors.  I do not think that this is
necessarily the best solution, since it may limit flexibility and
cause curriculum ossification.  The simple and ideal solution is
for increased communication and awareness between instructors of
what everyone is doing, which can of course not be forced, but must
come about naturally through the efforts of instructors.

I would like to add one final observation--there seems to be a
feeling among many students that classes are not a particularly
high priority, a feeling which may be exacerbated by the impression
that they are not viewed as a high priority by the faculty as a
whole.  To use the above as an illustration, if the faculty do not
take the time to be aware of what their fellow instructors are doing,
it reflects poorly on the regard in which they hold classes.  A similar
effect is seen in colloquium attendance--few students attend partly
due to the fact that few faculty attend, and students do take their
cues on how important Institute activities are from the faculty.
Perhaps the rotation of teaching assignments would demonstrate
that classes are in fact a valued component of the grad program,
though the potential for increased lack of awareness about what
other classes are covering is a potential drawback.

This memo is meant to communicate some graduate student impressions
of the graduate program here, and not so much to offer solutions.
Awareness of how things are being perceived by others is crucial
before debate can begin on what, if any, changes should be made.  It
may be that after debating these issues the status quo is determined
to be the best way to go, but I believe that ongoing debate is
necessary to ensure the IfA optimally serves all its members.