General Education Task Force Chairman Ira Berlin and other members of the committee were at Thursday’s University Senate meeting to hear comments and concerns on the draft general education plan.
At yesterday’s University Senate meeting, representatives voiced significant concern over how the new general education plan would be funded, how many courses would be offered and who would teach them.
The General Education Task Force released the plan two weeks ago and brought it to the senate for discussion yesterday. Task force members, who were seeking additional input to make the plan better, also wanted to give the senate a chance to discuss the plan fully before it is voted on later in the semester.
If the senate votes to approve the general education plan, it will likely be made into university policy. The senate is the highest governing body at the university and directly advises university President Dan Mote on policy decisions, and Mote has only ignored their recommendations once in a dozen years.
History professor Ira Berlin, who chaired the task force, said although the group has not formed specific guidelines for how the plan will be implemented over time, the suggested program was feasible and affordable.
“There’s a large question of whether or not we can afford this program,” Berlin said. “We’ve begun to examine this question, and we have some numbers. They aren’t final but they’re better than back of the envelope numbers. We think this is affordable because it will be enacted over time, at least over the course of four years and maybe more. We’ve been given that confidence from the provost who has supported it so far. We’re confident this program can be administered.”
Because the document explaining the plan is so large, senators and task force representatives were each given one minute to speak, allowing opportunities for others to raise concerns and questions.
One issue that came up numerous times was how many additional courses will have to be created and who will be responsible for teaching them. Many senators expressed concern that the new program would put additional strain on already overburdened teaching assistants.
“Regarding the issue of who is going to teach these courses, if it were as simple as hiring adjunct lecturers, the English department would have solved this problem 20 years ago,” Graduate School Dean Charles Caramello said. “It’s not that simple. This is going to be a real problem and we can’t put that burden on the TAs.”
Undergraduate senator Bob Hayes, a junior mechanical engineering major, echoed this sentiment.
“I’m a TA in an ‘I’-Series course, and the biggest challenge is with implementation of the class size,” he said.
Hayes described how, in order for students to get the most out of these classes, smaller class sizes are crucial.
Berlin said that the task force hoped to address that concern in the future.
“We don’t look at these programs as fixed, we look at them as always changing,” Berlin said. “We’re very hopeful that over time, we can reduce the size of the ‘I’-Series courses. It’s a matter of resources.”
The “I”-Series courses are what officials hope will be the trademark of the university’s new general education plan. While one senator questioned the need for such an expensive program, undergraduate students defended the unique courses.
The university offers a $5,000 stipend for professors to develop an “I”-Series course. If it is approved, $10,000 is then allocated to the department to support a TA for that course.
“This plan is definitely a step forward,” said Dave Tilley, a senator and professor in the agriculture and natural resources college. “But you’re really glossing over the cost of the ‘I’-Series courses. Is this an affordable plan? Is it worth it? Can we have the general education plan without these courses?”
Sally Simpson, a member of the task force and criminology and criminal justice professor, yielded the floor to an undergraduate student who wanted to speak about his experiences this semester in the “I”-Series course PUAF 289I: Cross-examining Climate Change.
“I want to answer the question of whether or not these courses are worth it,” said freshman government and politics major Matthew Popkin. “I’ve learned so much already, and it’s only a couple months into it. The professor is great, the class size is great. It’s been a defining aspect of my academic career already.”
Senators were both supportive of and questioning of the plan’s diversity requirement. Under the new plan, what has been known under CORE as the “diversity requirement” will be expanded into two categories: Understanding Pluralities in Society (UPS) and Cultural Competency (CC). Students may choose to take two UPS courses or one UPS and one CC course.
“I worry about the current wording,” said Sangeetha Madhavan, an African American studies professor. “It talks a lot about diversity but not about inequality and social justice. That’s something students really care about and need to hear more about.”
Other senators offered a lot of support to these new categorizations.
“The single best part of this plan is the area on diversity,” arts and humanities college Dean James Harris said. “In meeting with my undergraduate advisory board, they have uniformly questioned the depth and reality of the diversity courses we offer. Culture is great but diversity is something this program promises. We need this. It’s very important, very basic and that’s why we need this program.”
The task force presented to the Senate Executive Committee two days before the plan was released to the public and received a nearly unanimous vote to be sent to the full advisory body. And after the senate meeting Berlin said he is confident the plan has a large base of support there, too, noting the senate’s focus on implementation is a good sign.
“It means people are satisfied with our proposal and eager to move on,” he said after the meeting. “They want to begin the discussion of how to implement it. It’s not a mechanical program — we’re going to learn as we go.”
redding@umdbk.com
