Distribution requirements plan passes Congress, but members express concerns
Loss of PE requirement concerns some, as does transfer credit value
By: Katherine Janowski
Issue date: 11/17/09 Section: News
A majority of voting members at the Student Congress meeting Sunday night agreed with the faculty proposal for distribution requirements - but not without concerns. In an informal vote, 18 were in favor of the proposal, 30 voted yes with reservations, eight voted no and 21 chose to abstain.
The Committee on the Management of Academic Operations' proposal was brought before Congress so the student leaders could inform the faculty of the students' opinion of the proposal before they vote on it at next month's meeting. The proposal would eliminate the six course groups students must currently fill and replace them with a "2-2-2" model: two courses from arts and humanities, two courses from science and mathematics and two from social science.
Congress's representation consists of one student representative from each recognized student organization on campus.
The faculty proposal presents a new set of distribution requirements that will take effect in fall 2010, pending a December vote by the faculty. Freshmen, sophomore and junior students will have the opportunity to choose whether they want to follow the new requirements or the currently established requirements.
At Sunday's meeting, several students voiced concerns about the proposal. Some had issues with transfer credits, which will not count toward group requirements under MAO's proposal.
Student Body President Nikki Craker said, "There are more specific classes that you have to take to fill the group requirements under this policy."
Students also expressed concerns about the number of choices they will have to fill each group. However, senior Laura Pearce, vice president of academic affairs, said course selections will not be noticeably reduced.
Students also objected to the proposed elimination of the physical education requirement. Critics said they were worried about the physical well-being of students, as well as the losing physical education professors.
However, according to senior Aaron Dicker, vice president of student affairs, past discussion on this topic has demonstrated that most of the faculty thinks this is a "step in the right direction."
Future Congress meetings will address the possibility of removing allocations as a process from Congress.
The Committee on the Management of Academic Operations' proposal was brought before Congress so the student leaders could inform the faculty of the students' opinion of the proposal before they vote on it at next month's meeting. The proposal would eliminate the six course groups students must currently fill and replace them with a "2-2-2" model: two courses from arts and humanities, two courses from science and mathematics and two from social science.
Congress's representation consists of one student representative from each recognized student organization on campus.
The faculty proposal presents a new set of distribution requirements that will take effect in fall 2010, pending a December vote by the faculty. Freshmen, sophomore and junior students will have the opportunity to choose whether they want to follow the new requirements or the currently established requirements.
At Sunday's meeting, several students voiced concerns about the proposal. Some had issues with transfer credits, which will not count toward group requirements under MAO's proposal.
Student Body President Nikki Craker said, "There are more specific classes that you have to take to fill the group requirements under this policy."
Students also expressed concerns about the number of choices they will have to fill each group. However, senior Laura Pearce, vice president of academic affairs, said course selections will not be noticeably reduced.
Students also objected to the proposed elimination of the physical education requirement. Critics said they were worried about the physical well-being of students, as well as the losing physical education professors.
However, according to senior Aaron Dicker, vice president of student affairs, past discussion on this topic has demonstrated that most of the faculty thinks this is a "step in the right direction."
Future Congress meetings will address the possibility of removing allocations as a process from Congress.
Be the first to comment on this story