|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Rice Thresher
Phone:
|
by Olivia Allison thresher editorial staff The spring recess students will have next weekend will no longer exist two years from now. The faculty voted to eliminate the spring recess and move spring break one week later for the 2002-'03 school year at Tuesday's general faculty meeting. At the Jan. 31 general faculty meeting, Speaker for the Faculty Council Bob Patten presented a preliminary 2002-'03 calendar. Many faculty members suggested moving the week-long spring break, usually the first week of March, to one week later. Faculty members supported this change because they wanted Rice's spring break to be at the same time as Houston Independent School District's. At the meeting, faculty also spoke strongly in favor of making the spring and fall semesters equal in length. The spring semester currently has 67 class days while the fall semester has 70. Eliminating the break will make the number of class days in the spring semester closer to the number of days in the fall semester. "The faculty expressed a strong preference for making the semesters equal lengths," he said. Registrar Jerry Montag said he thought some students would benefit from the elimination of spring recess because they might find it difficult to readjust to school after having a break. "I think if you polled the students, I think you'd have various opinions, and some students - I'm guessing - like the break and some students just like to continue going to class," Montag said. "Basically what you're doing is you have your week off, you get back to a routine, and then all of a sudden you're off again for another two days. For some students it's probably a little more difficult to get back into the processes." Patten said another reason for eliminating spring recess is that the two breaks would be too close together after spring break was moved a week later. "You couldn't come back for a week and be off again," he said. "There was no rationale for that second break when you had spring break later. ... You're just going to the end of the semester, and there's no way for people to head out the semester." Montag said he and Patten met in February to discuss the 2002-'03 academic year and produced four potential calendars. The first possible calendar left the spring schedule as it has been in the recent past. The second eliminated the two-day spring recess. The third, the version approved at Tuesday's meeting, eliminated the two-day recess and moved spring break one week later. The last calendar option also eliminated the two-day recess but in addition proposed starting school one week later and holding commencement one week later, which would move spring break later a week automatically. The four options were presented to the University Standing Committee on Undergraduate Curriculum, which recommended the third to the Faculty Council. CUC Chair John Zammito said the option chosen best represents the needs expressed at the Jan. 31 general faculty meeting. At that meeting, many professors said they wanted the week-long spring break to coincide with HISD's. The fourth calendar option, Zammito said, was unacceptable because the weather is too hot late in May to hold an outdoor commencement ceremony. No formal student input was gathered because the two undergraduate representatives on the CUC, Brian Stoler (Hanszen '01) and Wiess College senior Sarah Pitre, were unable to attend the meeting at which the vote on calendar changes took place. Pitre, who said she was unable to attend because she had another meeting that day, said she did not have a clear idea of what the options for the proposed calendar changes were. She said she had heard the week-long spring break would move one week later in the spring, and she supported this. She said she had also heard the two-day recess would be eliminated to make the semesters equal in length, but she did not know this measure would be voted on. "No one knew what the spring calendar was going to say," Pitre said. "I had nothing to say at the time because I didn't know what it was going look like." However, Pitre said she understood why the change was made. "My natural reaction was that that sucks, but I knew why they did it was to make it more fair for the professors," she said. "I think spring recess happens so late in the year, I don't know how much students need it." Patten said the academic factors were the most important in creating the calendar. "We had to design a calendar on academic grounds - that had to be the most important consideration," Patten said. "You don't set a calendar by a student poll, you do it for academic reasons." Patten said the fall semester had 14 class days for each day of the week, which was ideal, so shortening the fall semester to make it even with the spring was not suggested. Montag said two days had to be added to the spring semester to equalize the number of class days, but other methods of adding these days were not considered. Although no one at Tuesday's meeting spoke against the proposal, History Professor Ira Gruber said he did not know if students would attend the classes on those days because they sometimes fall on Easter weekend or during Passover. "I just feel that students will vote with their feet when it comes to the traditional holidays," Gruber said. "And those of us who are teaching on Thursday and Friday of what has been called Easter week or whatever holiday is associated with that day are likely to not have any students around. "We might feel good about the calendar because we're offering 69 days worth of classes, but I'm very skeptical about students being willing to attend those two days." Patten agreed that this could be a potential problem, saying students skipping those days would be more of a problem in years during which Easter and Passover are at the same time. However, he said, equalizing the semester lengths was more important. All the same, professors should respect students who miss class because of religious beliefs. English Professor Dennis Huston said he did not attend Tuesday's meeting, but that he did not support eliminating the two-day recess. "I'm not a big fan of eliminating vacations late in the semester when students need a real break, and they're not the only ones who need a break," Huston said. "All of us can give up one class. It's a useful way of getting caught up on work, getting caught up on sleep or getting caught up on play." Huston said he thought faculty in the science- and engineering-related departments would be more concerned about the number of class days. "The real problem is that engineers feel like they have to cover so much material, where humanities professors just reorganize their classes," he said. Patten said if students strongly oppose the elimination of the break, they should voice their opinions to the faculty. However, he said, students should not criticize the 2002-'03 calendar before it has a chance to be tested. "We shouldn't be afraid to try something new that has good reasons for it, but nothing is carved in stone."
- back - |
|
|
Search the Thresher pages:
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of: The Rice Thresher, Rice University MS-524, PO Box 1892, Houston, TX 77251-1892, USA. The Thresher Online Project -- ethresh@listserv.rice.edu |
