The Observer, October 19, 2007
Volume XL, Issue 8
Editorial: Scheduling change would be mistake
On Tuesday, USG voted down General Assembly Resolution R.17-07, A Resolution to Support the Implementation of a Revised Standard Teaching Grid. This resolution, which was introduced by the Academic Affairs Committee, would turn Thursday's Provost's Hour into a Provost's Exam Block. Classes could be scheduled during this time as well, and an Undergraduate Activities Period would be added from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. each weekday to make up for lost time during the day.
David Poerschke, VP of Academic Affairs, spoke in support of the resolution, citing the fact that classroom space during the day, especially between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., is tight.
Adam Rupe, USG president, opposed the resolution for several relevant reasons, primarily the endangerment of student happiness, faculty/student interaction, supplemental lectures and presentations, and community building.
"It's important for the university, through policies and procedures that they set in place, to be conscientious about student wellness and building a campus community," said Rupe. "Putting courses during this time would be detrimental to community building."
Recognizing that USG does not have the final say in this matter, we at The Observer offer them our support. We agree with USG's conviction that a change to the standard teaching grid would be a change for the worse.
First, classrooms are not being used to their maximum potential during peak hours. While some buildings, especially the newer ones on the Case Quad, are packed, other buildings seem less occupied. Those administrators in charge of coordinating class times and locations must be flexible: if an engineering class doesn't require any specific equipment found only in an engineering building, it doesn't really need to be there.
In addition, this policy change would have little impact on scheduling in the long run. Most large lecture classes would use the Provost's Exam Block for testing three or four times a semester, preventing the students taking the class from scheduling another class during the 11:30 slot. Essentially, only a few classes would be able to take place during this time.
The impact that the change would have would be negative. The 11:30 slot on Tuesday and Thursday is a welcome respite for most students – extra time to eat lunch, attend meetings or lectures, converse with faculty, or do last-minute studying before class. Encroaching on this break would be a mistake. Furthermore, students required to take specific sequences of classes, namely engineers, have relatively inflexible scheduling options and might end up in four long classes one after the other.
Finally, the proposed Undergraduate Activities Period is completely unnecessary and would result in most of the campus going home early for a nap. Those who have mandatory late afternoon activities, such as varsity athletes, already know not to schedule classes late in the day.
An alternate plan must be found to solve the overcrowding problem in our classrooms. Taking away our lunch break is not the way to do so.
