Central in the formal and informal discussions regarding
curriculum reforms for many years has been the sensitive issue of the academic
calendar. Many faculty members indicate that the current 12-8-12 calendar
creates considerable frustration, most typically during the Winter Term when
the shortened term (more typically seven weeks) creates problems with student
retention, “absorption” time,
and instructor capacity to cover the same amount of material as any standard
course offered in the wing terms.
In addition, the ‘one-size-fits-all’
model of courses all fitting in a 4-hour course credit mold with classes
meeting every day seems non-ideal for some disciplines. On the other hand, several very
unique programs have evolved around the original intent of the Winter Term to
create exotic and unusual offerings that could not be as effectively offered in
conventional semesters, including for example, internships, foreign study
experiences (e.g., Biology’s Costa Rica program), the medical ethics course sequence and Chemistry’s
Techniques course among others.
A feature often overlooked in calendar discussions that may be
more important than the “special” opportunities uniquely provided by Winter Term
per se is the flexibility imparted by three scheduling periods spread throughout the academic
year. This allows Furman students a unique opportunity to engage in off-campus
programs, internships (e.g., Poli Sci’s Washington Experience),
research, and other special opportunities without missing an entire half-year
of academic credit on
campus. For science majors and most pre-professional students for which
sequencing is an important and necessary component, it typically facilitates
opportunities to register for lower level courses at least two of the three
terms each year, making possible their regular participation in study abroad
and other enriching off-campus programs. Importantly, the three-term approach
also serves to maximize the efficient utilization of classroom and laboratory
space in the University, with classes already occupying nearly every classroom
each day of the week. (In fact, were Furman to adopt a two-term system,
laboratory needs in the lab sciences would increase by a factor of
approximately 1.5X each term. Space shortages already present would be seriously
amplified, and the planned construction of new facilities has NOT taken into
account any change in calendar that would result in increased lab space
requirements).
Conversations with many current and prospective students, their
parents and Furman alumni over the past twelve years as a departmental liaison
serving in that capacity have suggested to me that many of our prospects (and
their critically involved parents) are attracted to Furman simply because of
the uniqueness of our current curricular approach. Indeed, there are many
highly “selective” liberal arts colleges across the country with
excellent facilities, quality liberal arts curricula, dedicated faculty, gifted
students and beautiful campuses that all look very similar to each other (and to Furman) in the videos, brochures
and web pages, save for some very interesting features such as engaged learning
and the academic calendar. It would certainly be a great tragedy if part of the
magnetism of the Furman experience for many of our most competitive students
were lost in the comparison of looking “just like everyone else” with
respect to basic curricula, calendar, and campus. Having served on the last calendar task force
in the mid-90’s, I remember vividly that the student body was actually overwhelmingly in favor of the 3-2-3
calendar rather than other national ‘norms’ such as the proposed
J-term, even in spite of the Winter Term stresses.
Given the above concerns on both sides of the calendar issue,
the question intuitively arises, is there any way to take advantage of the
positive design features of the current calendar while at the same time
alleviating the stress of Winter Term, and (less importantly) putting Furman on
a schedule that more closely parallels other institutions regarding scheduled
start/stop times? I do not profess a perfect solution - or even a highly
detailed plan, but I do have a proposal for consideration. Essentially, instead
of moving to a conventional semester (two 16-week terms) or a “J term”
system (two 14 week terms
with a three week January term), consider for a moment a move to a conventional
quarter system with the “unconventional” following features:
(1) Three 10-week terms (plus finals week) offering up to 50
class days per term… a mild reduction to the wing terms of our current calendar, so
current 4-hour courses that continued to meet every day would have no need to
be totally re-designed.
(2) The option to create a 3-hour course alternative, where
3-hour courses would typically meet 3-4 periods (i.e., one period = 50 minutes)
per week (4-hour courses would meet 5 periods per week as in the current
system). Further, there is also opportunity for 1 or 2 hours courses to be
offered (e.g., seminar courses in any of the three regular terms, or perhaps
even sequenced 2-hour courses), or even 5 or 6-hour course offerings so long as
the departments can justify the need and academic integrity of such courses to
the satisfaction of the Curriculum Committee and general faculty.
(3) A middle quarter split at the midterm over the Christmas
holidays. While non-ideal in some respects, this would put the Furman calendar
roughly equivalent to other liberal arts colleges in regard to dates for the
start of school and graduation, and would facilitate the development of special
5-week courses (e.g., 2 hours each) that could be offered expressly in the
middle quarter. Some of the special courses might be foreign study
opportunities, for example, which could take some advantage of the Winter
holidays to increase the utilization of the 5-week term, thus retaining some of
the supposed features of a “J-term”.
A typical student would create a schedule that would average 11
hours per term. This could be one (4) hour course and two (3) hour courses, or
any combination of courses (which would vary by term) such that on average the
student would complete 33 hours of academic credit per year, a total of 132
hours by graduation.
Advantages of the Proposed System:
(1) Core courses, distribution requirements and all courses in
the major could be offered at any time during the year with three different
scheduling options available, maximizing the flexibility for students and
departments alike (e.g., faculty engaged on foreign study would still be
on-campus for 2/3 of the academic year!).
(2) Departments could determine the number of hours (meetings
per week) that best fit their particular needs in terms of student retention,
content, absorption time, etc., offering much more flexibility than currently
exists with our 3-2-3 system OR a conventional semester system.
(3) The split middle term would open the door for innovation
(e.g., students off-campus for a 5-week foreign study could precede or
follow-up their experience with five weeks in the classroom on campus,
Internships and research opportunities could occupy five-week segments, etc.).
(4) The efficiency of campus space and facilities utilization
would continue to be maximized, irrespective of whether courses met on a 3, 4,
or 5-day a week schedule.
(5) Such a calendar retains an element of unique design,
allowing Furman students the option to focus on only a few subjects very
intensely, or in other cases where appropriate, more subjects less intensely.
The flexibility to exists for the student to change that ratio up to twelve
times through the senior year.
(6) The start date for such a calendar would be mid-late August
(similar to other colleges and the public school system), with an early-May
graduation, facilitating better alignment of our summer academic and engaged
learning programs with other institutions.
(7) Given the fact that three scheduling periods would be
maintained as in the current system, the transition into a new curriculum and
calendar would be less difficult and complex for students and faculty alike.
At this point I don’t think delving further into the details is
useful or necessary to consider the basic concept, but I would simply add just
a couple closing thoughts. I attended an undergraduate liberal arts institution
with a 4-1-4 that adopted traditional semesters just as I started my program. The
graduate program in which I taught was on the quarter system, and I have taught
under Furman’s 3-2-3 for thirteen years. In my view, there are any number of advantages and
disadvantages to any of these approaches, no one system best fits the needs of
all individuals or programs, and the faculty burden is no more or less under
any particular system if it is fairly administered (i.e., the pie is the same
size no matter how you slice it). Irrespective of the calendar chosen, however,
the uniqueness of the Furman experience IS something that DOES matter a great
deal, an experience that has served us extraordinarily well in recent
institutional history, and one that should be considered most carefully as we
strive to make it better still for future generations.
Posted by love at
October 18, 2004 06:21 PM
Discuss
this proposal in the forum, or leave a comment below!