Date: December 1, 2006 2:46:06 PM CST
I protest the passage of this motion for many reasons, three of which are the following:
1. The motion is too vague, too unspecific. Voting for this motion is like voting for a motion that there should be taxes, without specifying how much or for what.
2. I am opposed to any change in the General Education Requirement that will require individual degree programs to increase the number of hours for graduation or to reduce the number of courses in the major. In Appendix A, it is proposed to eliminate the 011-Additional Communications (3 hours of upper division SWC) to make room for the Freshman Signature Course. In my program, we currently use a required upper division course with a sufficient writing component to meet this requirement. While the SWC requirement can be eliminated, we cannot eliminate the course. Hence, we would have to increase the number of hours for graduation or to reduce the number of hours in the major. In addition to this, from where are the hours going to come for the Sophomore Signature Course?
3. The introduction of the Freshman Signature Course is going to be incredibly expensive. It has been said that the money will be raised from private sources. That's great. How can we tell the state legislature that we need more money and then show them that we can get what we need elsewhere. The next time we ask for more money, the legislature can tell us to look elsewhere. This is exactly what happened with tuition deregulation. When we say we need more money, they give us less and effectively tell us to increase tuition.
Prof. David G. Hull
The University of Texas at Austin
Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics
1 University Station, C0600
Austin, TX 78712-0235