ABEng FCG Meeting
17 Aug 2000, E1A 03-14
Present at meeting:
|The meeting started at 1815 hours.|
|Next FCG Meeting||Action|
Time to be at 5.30 pm but will allow for 'chat-session' until 6pm where the FCG proper will begin. Same venue.
Day will be on Tuesday as it was realised that some FCG members would want to attend CCPG sessions on Wednesday, and Legion sessions on Thursday.
Sharon to inform FCG of time and venue
|Because the year ones in our comm have not experienced the usual FCG session, the rest of the comm will present the first FCG session.||Arthur, Brandon, Ivan and Norman|
Fred suggested that the FCG session will also be used to gather feedback from the FCG on the following:
1. What draws you to FCG sessions?
|It was first suggested to hold CG sessions separate from weekly FCG sessions.|
|A system whereby FCG members would sign up for timeslots for CG sessions was suggested by Brandon. However, Dominic was of the opinion that members would not sign up of their own accord, unless prodded in person, eg. by telephone calls.|
After much discussion, it was decided to maintain the current structure ie. CG sharings after the Praise and Worship at FCG sessions.
Ivan briefed that each CG will contain two CGLs, of which one will be a freshman and the other to be a senior. Also each CG will contain one ex-CGL.
Ivan brought up that it would be possible for the new CGLs (to be appointed) to observe how CG sessions are conducted in NUSCSS FCGs of other faculties.
He also mentioned having preparatory sessions for the CGLs and having the campus minister, Stella, speak to them.
He is also trying to persuade some FCG members to take up the responsibility as CGLs.
Based on the current level of attendance Dominic suggested 4 CGs will be enough
|Form of FCG sessions|
|Dominic highlighted that the spiritual programme presented by NUSCSS is just a guide.He opined that in order for effective presentation of the material in the spiritual programme, speakers need to be good.|
|Andrew suggested getting speakers from outside NUS.|
|However Brandon said that there is no need for good speakers when all that is presented is just facts and teachings.|
|It was suggested by Ivan that CGLs present the material for the topic of the session individually among their own CGs.|
|Ivan also suggested that the sessions can be activity-based.|
|Randall suggested setting a spiritual direction and formalising it, such as in a Mission Statement.|
|He suggested that it should be something that we can measure ourselves against a tangible manner.|
|Ivan brought up the difficulty of measuring things like Faith.|
|Randall suggested using the level of attendance of FCG sessions, and Ivan replied that FCG sessions are avenues for the community to gather, and as such attendance is not really an issue.|
|Norman suggested that each member tries to come up with their own ideas to be discussed in the next meeting.||All|
|Dominic suggested having a monthly evaluation of the direction of the community.|
|Norman was concerned that such a piecewise manner of setting the direction would not be useful. Arthur highlighted the advantage of flexibility in making changes, and Ivan mentioned that the views of members should be constantly sought, outside of FCG sessions.|
|Norman then suggested a whole-year framework should be set, and the evaluations made against this framework.|
|Brandon suggested that each FCG comm member do a reflection of one's roles and one's strength and weaknesses, to be discussed at next meeting.||All|
With no other matters, the meeting ended at 1935 hrs.