The Undergraduate Council (UC) passed a bill at its weekly meeting last night in support of soliciting student feedback on Allston Burr Senior Tutors and House Masters in conjunction with the annual tutor evaluations that are already in place.

The position paper calls for all students in the Houses to “be given the option to answer directed questions and give comments for their Senior Tutors and Masters,” beginning next January. The bill passed 38-1-1.

The paper was co-written by Student Affairs Committee (SAC) Chair Aaron D. Chadbourne ’06 and Committee on House Life (CHL) member Faryl W. Ury ’06, who is also a Crimson editor.

Currently only graduating seniors have the opportunity to give directed feedback to Senior Tutors and House Masters as part of their exit surveys. Sophomores, juniors, and seniors can already give feedback to resident and non-resident tutors each January through an online evaluation form.

In an interview yesterday, Dean of the College Benedict H. Gross ’71 noted the effectiveness of the existing evaluation mechanism.

“Each year I meet with the Senior Tutors to discuss the comments on the survey and meet with the House Masters to discuss the survey, and they’re critical components of how we assess the jobs,” Gross said.

But Chadbourne noted that only soliciting evaluations from graduating seniors may not provide a complete assessment.

“At each different period in your undergraduate experience you might have different reasons to interact with your Senior Tutor and House Masters,” Chadbourne said.

And Gross wrote in an e-mail that the prospect of incorporating Senior Tutor and House Master evaluations into the current tutor surveys “sounds like an interesting proposal.”

The position paper will be presented at this Thursday’s CHL meeting.

“We are asking for a commitment that this should happen, and then we’ve suggested that a panel of Masters, Senior Tutors and students come up with the questions,” Chadbourne said.

In other business, the UC passed a bill 38-0-2 to create a new online events calendar under the UC’s jurisdiction. The proposed calendar would be funded by the College and integrated with the existing University calendar.

In addition, the UC would require all student groups seeking money from the grants fund to advertise their events on the calendar in order to receive funding.

“It is feasible to say that groups that want money from our grants fund must advertise their events on our calendar,” said Benjamin D. Wei ’08, one of the sponsors of the bill.

The UC also tabled a bill on the docket last night to eliminate possible loopholes in tracking UC representatives’ meeting attendance. The UC decided to wait until an electronic voting system is considered and potentially implemented.

Jason L. Lurie ’05 leveled strong criticism at his fellow council members at the end of the meeting, pinning their opposition to the bill on their desire to not be held accountable for meeting attendance.

“I’m really disappointed that you guys don’t want to come to meetings,” Lurie declared.

The UC also approved its sixth grants package of the semester—totaling $11,636.18 in cash for student groups.

—Margaret W. Ho and Joshua P. Rogers contributed to the reporting of this story. —Staff writer Evan M. Vittor can be reached at evittor@fas.harvard.edu.