TheSkiffView
LEFT OUT
Students excluded from Core revision

The Core Curriculum Committee, which was charged by the Faculty Senate to propose a new core curriculum, is meeting regularly.

But behind closed doors.

The academic prestige of the university is on the line. A new core curriculum will affect what classes are offered and potentially change the size of some departments.

Students and faculty have a right to know not only what decisions the committee will make, but the debate and reasoning behind those choices. The meetings should be open.

Many faculty members strongly criticized the Common Undergraduate Experience proposal last spring because they felt it had been drafted with little input. Hopes of landing a proposal on the chancellor’s desk that semester were quickly dashed.

In response to criticism, the Faculty Senate hosted town hall meetings, created Internet forums and actively sought more feedback. Many professors worked tirelessly, meeting twice a month to work out differences.
But closed meetings could jeopardize that hard work.

The central question is this: What if the committee produces a proposal, that like its predecessors, is met with harsh words? Will the Faculty Senate have enough time to approve a proposal by the end of the semester, which the chancellor has indicated he wants?

Probably not.

Open meetings allow for quick feedback, giving committee members more time to revise a proposal. Waiting until after Nov. 20 for such feedback could be a recipe for disaster.

The faculty need to pass a proposal by semester’s end. We can’t discuss this forever.