Dean pushes for staff, faculty to vote on CORE
CORE: Hayes urges further discussion
Kelly McGee
Issue date: 11/6/08 Section: News
The core proposal is still just a proposal, but the associate deans and John Hayes, dean of the college of Arts and Sciences, are looking for that to change during the faculty meeting on Thursday, Nov. 6.
In the Sept. 25 issue of The Pacific Index, there were two articles to help introduce the intricacies of the core and four-credit proposals. In the Oct. 9 issue, two new articles on both proposals were written; four-credit had passed with a 66 to 18 faculty vote, but the core proposal had made no progress.
"The only reason the faculty did not vote on the core last month is that we ran out of time in a meeting with numerous agenda items," said David DeMoss, associate dean. "This is a very important decision and the discussion was not finished, so the faculty decided to wait until the next month to take the vote."
So what has changed in the last month? Hayes explained after the October meeting that rearticulating the goals of the proposal seemed necessary. "More discussion needs to occur," he said.
On Oct. 27, Hayes distributed a rationale for the faculty to reiterate the proposal goals.
The rationale is an attempt to answer the faculty's questions and uncertainties so they are better prepared to take a vote. Also, CASC has changed the proposal to be implemented in 2010, to give time for details to fall into place and remaining questions to be answered.
"We have a year and a half to get it right, and we will," said Hayes in the rationale.
Yet some faculty still seem uncomfortable with the idea of taking a vote so soon, causing more uncertainty in whether a vote will take place at the next faculty meeting.
"While some folks would describe the unanswered questions about the proposal as details to be worked out later, other folks feel that the details are in fact big gaping holes," said Lisa Sardinia, associate professor of biology.
The focal studies model, which is the central change to the current core, seems to be what many faculty are most uncomfortable deciding on just yet.
In the Sept. 25 issue of The Pacific Index, there were two articles to help introduce the intricacies of the core and four-credit proposals. In the Oct. 9 issue, two new articles on both proposals were written; four-credit had passed with a 66 to 18 faculty vote, but the core proposal had made no progress.
"The only reason the faculty did not vote on the core last month is that we ran out of time in a meeting with numerous agenda items," said David DeMoss, associate dean. "This is a very important decision and the discussion was not finished, so the faculty decided to wait until the next month to take the vote."
So what has changed in the last month? Hayes explained after the October meeting that rearticulating the goals of the proposal seemed necessary. "More discussion needs to occur," he said.
On Oct. 27, Hayes distributed a rationale for the faculty to reiterate the proposal goals.
The rationale is an attempt to answer the faculty's questions and uncertainties so they are better prepared to take a vote. Also, CASC has changed the proposal to be implemented in 2010, to give time for details to fall into place and remaining questions to be answered.
"We have a year and a half to get it right, and we will," said Hayes in the rationale.
Yet some faculty still seem uncomfortable with the idea of taking a vote so soon, causing more uncertainty in whether a vote will take place at the next faculty meeting.
"While some folks would describe the unanswered questions about the proposal as details to be worked out later, other folks feel that the details are in fact big gaping holes," said Lisa Sardinia, associate professor of biology.
The focal studies model, which is the central change to the current core, seems to be what many faculty are most uncomfortable deciding on just yet.
Be the first to comment on this story