Seniors Must Speak Up for Selective Class Scheduling
January 14, 2010 • By Ming Ivory,
Print This Post
Email This Post
Faculty Senate Considers a More Open Policy for Class Enrollment; Next Meeting is Jan. 28 and Open to the Public
Dr. Val Larsen recently introduced an academic policy proposal in the faculty senate, which I am confident many students will be motivated to support. It would: “…urge the Registrar to create a registration mechanism that will allow Seniors to enroll in courses without regard to pre-requisites. Unless there are compelling reasons to exclude them, the mechanism should admit Seniors to courses on a space available basis, after all others who are required to take the courses have had an opportunity to enroll.”
Last year, I introduced a similar measure, and The Breeze covered the events surrounding it. They talked to many students who had favorable opinions about the change, but as the students didn’t know ahead of time, the measure was quickly defeated.
I call upon ALL students who believe that “freedom of choice” is the hallmark of a first-class university to take action now to bring this worthy yet minor change in policy to fruition. Students who wish to resist the limitations on what they can take, who desire intellectual challenge even if they are not an Honors student, who would like to sample some of the famous professor’s courses even if they are not a major in that department, should support this change and let their desires be known. Too many faculty try to restrict enrollment in upper-division classes so as to make it easier on them. They denigrate students’ academic intelligence by defining too precisely, the acceptable paths through the university.
When I was an undergraduate, my university had this provision. It enabled me, as a math major, to enroll in an upper-division course in Italian Mannerism, an art history class for which I had no background. Sure it was challenging, and yes, I had to do a little “extra work” reading up on the Italian Renaissance, against which the Mannerists were uniting. But as a senior, I could handle it, and it made the course infinitely more interesting and intensive than taking “Art History 101” with a class full of freshmen.
Another example: It used to be possible to fulfill your “general education” requirements with courses at ALL levels. Now you are told to “get it out of the way” in elementary freshman/sophomore courses. While knowledge can work that way, from the general to the specific, it can also work in the reverse: Specific and detailed knowledge can lead one to explore whole new categories of knowledge, and to seek out the general rules that govern the specific case. General education is a lifelong proposition.
Undergraduate education assumes a major, but it shouldn’t be limited to that. By limiting enrollments in the upper division to their majors only, departments are sending a message that they have no confidence in your ability to “rise to the academic challenge” of entering a difficult course for the sheer joy of learning or just because you are curious. I urge you to unite with your faculty in support of this measure. Put the power back into YOUR hands to decide what is worthy and interesting to study! Take hold of your education and support – with letters to The Breeze or even better, the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Target your Departmental representative to the FACULTY SENATE. (Find your Senator at: http://www.jmu.edu/facultysenate/senatemembers.shtml).
For more information about the faculty senate, go to: http://jmu.edu/facultysenate/ . Attend faculty senate meetings, which are open to all. The next meeting is Jan. 28, but I urge you to talk about it, and let your feelings be known to the people in the university who can make a difference.
Dr. Ming Ivory is an Integrated Science and Technology professor.
Contact Dr. Ivory at ivorymx@cisat.jmu.edu
Comments
2 Responses to “Seniors Must Speak Up for Selective Class Scheduling”
Got something to say?
Check Out New Videos!
March 4, 2010 Issue in Print
2010 Baseball & Softball Guide
Interesting proposition, Professor. I can certainly understand where this measure would come in handy for many students; I, myself, might have broadened my horizons a little more had I been allowed to do so.
As a clarification, this does not eliminate the need for all prerequisites, correct? It would seem that someone who wants to enroll in a 400-level French class, for instance, should at least have the basic background courses.
Thanks for the comment, Kathryn. Prerequisites are a good guide and a smart student will certainly take them into consideration. But Its funny you should use foreign language as an example. As an undergrad, I was a Math major, and doing a lot of science, too. The foreign language requirement got be to take French, and I had some good teachers there, and loved reading and writing in french, even though I wasn’t very good at it. But in foreign languages, QUANTITY does eventually make up for quality. In any case, my roommate studied German, and wanted me to do a Junior year abroad in Germany with her [math wouldn’t be so hard in a foreign language, she argued. In the end, I didn’t go; but I did want to study some german, but gee, I had enough to do with higher math and sciences and french; so I convinced the german teacher to let me just sit into the lit courses in German, so I could just be “exposed to” spoken language and good lit. I didn’t have the prereqs, of course; but I DID get something out of it. Certainly, not as much as a serious German student would have, but everyone has their own educational agenda, and I feel we shouldn’t limit people! The numbers taking advantage of this policy will likely be VERY small. I challenge those professors who are against it to think how many times someone without the right background has ASKED to be in a course: I think the problems are overestimated, especially for seniors, who presumably are quite realistic about what they will get out of a class, and are used to working hard and making up deficiencies. –or they SHOULD be by that time !