Search This Issue

Saint Louis University

It's feedback time. In the coming months faculty will get a chance to respond to a controversial report generated by the First-Year Task Force focusing on the nature and the quality of the first-year experience at Saint Louis University.

The report contains 24 recommendations, but the six that have drawn the most discussion revolve around creating a new University core curriculum, an issue that task force members found impossible to separate from the first-year freshman experience. Six more recommendations focus on other academic issues, and 12 deal with improving the quality of student life.

A special faculty hearing committee is meeting now to conduct open faculty discussions of the report. The committee's job, said Academic Vice President Michael Garanzini, SJ, is to listen and learn from as many faculty members as possible, then discuss and make recommendations on the report. The end result, Garanzini said, should greatly affect the quality of undergraduate life at the University.

"The hearing committee is charged with responsibility for development of a response to the First-Year Task Force's recommendations, after wide consultation with the faculty of each school through the appropriate college or school body, and by other appropriate means," Garanzini said.

The hearing board, consisting of 14 members from each of the University's different schools and colleges, met for the first time on March 14.

"The process is definitely to get the input of the faculty, to get as many faculty as possible to react to the report of the task force," said Dr. Jean-Robert Leguey-Feilleux, professor of political science and chair/facilitator of the hearing committee. "It will be a faculty-driven document. That is what members of the faculty want, and this is what we have started working toward. We envision having a very substantial number of meetings."

Leguey-Feilleux said the committee also will devise a set of report recommendations based on faculty responses.

"Right now we have a document that provides a framework for a common core curriculum, and the faculty are going to react to that framework, and we will see if there is enough support for it," he said. "If the support is mixed, we will see what we can do to make it a more viable plan to recommend to the Board of Undergraduate Studies. But before that, our recommendations will be sent to each of the schools and colleges of the University that will have a common core. The process will take some time."

Leguey-Feilleux said that no final timetables have been set for completion of the project, but the hearing committee will produce a status report by the end of the spring semester. "By then we'll have a better notion as to what ground we've covered and how long it will take us to come up with recommendations," he said. "We'll have a more precise end date then."

Leguey-Feilleux said the first meeting of the committee during spring break went very well. "People raised very legitimate issues," he said. "The atmosphere was cordial, although there is no doubt that there are issues that are going to be controversial. It's not unusual. Any time you touch the curriculum, it is controversial. But, so far, the people who raised controversial issues were very friendly and said their peace. If it continues at this tone, it will be very constructive."

Members of the hearing committee and the schools/departments they represent are Dr. Marla Berg-Weger (Social Service), Irma Ruebling (Allied Health), Dr. Ann Rule (Institute for Leadership and Public Service), Dr. Charles Ford and Tony Daly, SJ (Arts and Sciences), Dr. Swami Karunamoorthy (Parks), Dr. Deirdre Schweiss (Nursing), Dr. Muhammad Islam (Business and Administration), Phil Lyons (student life), Garth Hallett, SJ (Philosophy and Letters), Dr. Mary Portscheller (Professional Studies), Dr. Cynthia Stollhans (representing the Faculty Senate) and Dr. Tim Lomperis and Dr. David Crossley (representing the task force).

The recommendations of the task force, as presented in the report and as modified by the hearing committee, ultimately will go to the Board of Undergraduate Studies. It is anticipated that a special committee of the board could be set up, consisting of elected faculty members, whose responsibility would include both the development and implementation of the core and a review of any new degree programs. "This process and structure should ensure that ongoing development of a common core curriculum will remain in faculty hands and will be reported through the board of undergraduate studies," Garanzini said.

Garanzini added that each school of the University will be free to add to the common core when they set their own core curriculum. "Having a common core is something new to Saint Louis University," he added. "Many other universities have a general curriculum or common core. The process of arrving at one here at SLU is being developed even as we develop a common core."

A full copy of the report on the first-year experience and all 24 of its recommendations may be found on the World Wide Web at http://www.slu.edu/organizations/. For the latest information on the status of hearing committee meetings (the format and times of which may be set following a meeting on March 30), visit the Grand Connections web site at http://www.slu.edu/publications/gc.