Andrea Gore, associate professor
As a member of the science community, I would like to ask what kind
of
oversight will be used for the approval of topics and themes in signature
courses. For example I would strongly oppose a non-scientific topic
(such as "intelligent design") being cross-listed
in any way as a scientific course.
Such a topic hasa strictly religious or historical perspective. This
is only
one example, but what will prevent faculty from couching this type
of topic
in a scientific context?
Salomon Stavchansky, professor
Thank you for the invitation to comment on the recommendations
of the Task Force on Curricular Reform. I have taken this
opportunity to also comment on other issues which are relevant
to successful curricular reform. At the onset, it is my opinion
that the Curricular Reform proposal is ill conceived. The
proposal is costly, requires significant administrative infrastructure,
and does not propose serious academic standards. In my opinion,
the proposed curricular reform will probably not change the desired
academic outcomes. I fully support, and endorse the
minority report submitted by Dr. Hillis.
A university of a first class is an institution that attracts
excellent students, faculty and staff. It is an institution
that is at the cutting edge in the humanities and science. It
is the national and international competitive nature of the humanities
and science programs what keeps the university on a constant search
for excellence. This search for excellence includes the development
and implementation of the best methodology to disseminate knowledge,
and more importantly, to create knowledge. Furthermore, it is this
competitive nature that attracts the best faculty and students
to the university. I believe that we need to create a competitive
academic environment similar to the environment of the top universities
in the nation. A competitive environment that is similar
to the environment that our Athletics’ Department has created
for sports. It is this competitive environment, and the selection
of the best leadership that helped recruit the best athletes. This
has culminated with the National Championship. We need to
have a balance between athletics and academics. The perception
of the students, and for that matter of the community, is that
athletics is more important than academics. I read
in the newspapers, with joy and at the same time with great dismay,
the extraordinary expenditures to add approximately 10,000 additional
seats to the football stadium. Why is, that the University
does not highlight the construction of the new biomedical sciences
and nanotechnology buildings? Why did we fail to make a big
deal about the new imaging facility? Faculty should have
been interviewed about the benefits of these facilities, and the
community should have been made better aware of these initiatives. Why
is that we do not emphasize the endowments that are given to the
university to foster the humanities and the sciences. If
what we want is public relations, let’s use these examples
in addition to curricular reform. Let’s not forget
that perception is reality. If there is a lesson that
we can learn from athletes is that athletes work very hard to achieve
excellence. This philosophy needs to be imparted to the students. We
need to tighten the academic standards instead
of creating signatures courses, and suggesting that TA’s
instead of professors can teach and motivate students to pursue
higher levels of academics. Furthermore, I believe that we have
empowered the students, and this is a good thing. However,
the extent of empowerment, in my opinion, has been detrimental
to the faculty and indirectly to the students. We need to
do a better job interpreting teaching evaluations and how these
documents are used in the development of the faculty. Also,
the teaching message to the faculty needs to be better articulated
and more transparent. At the present time, it is clear to
the faculty that teaching by itself will not get faculty promoted. I
know of examples were faculty committed to teaching have not been
promoted because of lack of research dollars. Is this the
correct message?
The future success of the United States will largely depend on
the education that we impart to our students. Tightening
the academic standards and paying more attention to the depth of
knowledge of our students in the sciences and humanities will result
in the continuity of the world leadership of the United States,
and more importantly the defense of our nation. Simply stated,
it is a national priority. I believe that signature
courses, as proposed, will not do anything to strengthen the academic
standards of the students. These proposed courses may improve
the image of the University, but will definitely not change the
depth of knowledge of our students. We can hide weaknesses
in our academic programs, but we can not hide from the competitive
nature of the world. Furthermore, the recurrent resources
proposed in the curricular reform should be diverted to strengthen
the humanities and the sciences. Finally, if we want reform
we should revisit the multitude of Institutes and Programs in the
University. We need to attempt to improve quality
of academic programs by design and not by historical evolution. It
is time to do a serious introspective analysis of the quality of
what we presently have. Recently, Western Union announced
that telegrams are a thing of the past. This is a milestone
in the evolution of our culture. We should eliminate
what needs to be eliminated and not maintain inactive institutes
and programs in the structure of the university. We
need to eliminate the weak links that become the roadblocks to
the success of our university. We need to create a critical
path to improve the depth of knowledge of our students and give
them the best tool kit to succeed in our complex world. We
should enter into an era of academic renaissance. We
should internationalize the university and the involvement of our
students and faculty. Internationalization of the University
also involves a process to facilitate student involvement in foreign
languages.
Again, thank you for the invitation to comment on the recommendations
of the Task Force for Curriculum Reform. Please accept my apologies
for including additional suggestions to improve the academic environment
of the university.
|
