Two major campus organizations issued reports opposing an alternative academic calendar proposal until more research is done. GW is considering adding a mandatory summer session for rising juniors and a four-credit four-class system in a few years.
The Student Association and Joint Committee of Faculty and Students
cited a lack of detail about the execution of the plans and uses for additional revenue, and negative student life and academic effects.
“There are clear contradictions in this proposal that need to be resolved and then there needs to be an assurance that the increased revenue will go towards academics and hiring new faculty, not towards buying new property,” said Christian Berle, student co-chair of the Joint Committee of Faculty and Students.
The JCFS’ seven-page report critiques the mandatory summer session more than the four-by-four plan.
Under the current proposal, juniors would take off either their fall or spring semesters, following a summer in D.C. GW might mandate which semesters students need to take off, officials have said.
The JCFS’ report states that staying in D.C. for four consecutive semesters is unfavorable for students. The committee also noted a lack of interest among students and faculty in spending the summer at GW, impact on extracurricular activities and possible disinterest from applicants and current students.
The JCFS report criticized the four-by-four because although each class would be worth more credits, class time would not necessarily be increased.
The SA report addressed similar concerns, but offered alternatives to the plan rather than focusing on its negative aspects. The report outlines an optional winter or summer session, using examples from other universities such as University of Maryland and John Hopkins University.
“While not all students felt the same, there was the common response from many that the plan needed more research and many questions answered,” SA President Kris Hart said.
Berle said student interest in an optional winter or summer session is unlikely unless GW mandates it.
“It is very difficult to build a program not knowing if the program would pay for itself,” Berle said. “I think it would make the University program, but with possibility of students not taking classes, also comes the possibly of losing money.”
Both reports identify a lack of campus-wide approval to the proposal but support the administration’s idea to further the University’s national reputation and make financial and academic improvements.
The University could enroll an extra 1,000 students if the summer session were instituted. Revenue from the tuition, excluding costs for running the University during the summer, could equal about $12 million per year.
In addition to concern from the SA and JCFS, the Faculty Senate unanimously opposed the proposal last week.
“We are not surprised with this type of (unified) response (from the Faculty Senate, JCFS and SA),” said Lilien Robinson chair of the Faculty Senate.
She added that, “we are in constant review and examination, the faculty is not hesitant in making changes, but only when they are appropriate.”
