Home / Top Stories /
FA president says time increment changes have not been determined for academic calendar change
By Annie Harrison on October 12, 2012 6:00 am / 3 comments
Faculty Association President Laura Frey said it is yet to be determined if time increments for classes would increase with a 15-week calendar.
The academic calendar committee did not address that topic, and it is not a decision the committee could make, Frey said. If the academic calendar change were to move forward, that decision would probably be made by the Academic Senate.
“That was not a charge of the academic calendar committee,” she said.
Frey said the academic calendar committee was charged with taking a look at the present calendar in comparison to other institutions, and looking at possible calendar changes that would fit student interests. Under the change, the fall 2014 semester would begin on Sept. 2, after Labor Day, effectively eliminating one week of structured class time.
Students requested to pursue an academic calendar that started after Labor Day so they would have more time to work over the summer, Frey said. She said students raised concerns about being able to earn more money to pay for their tuition.
The proposed academic calendar change would not affect winter break, she said.
The task of the academic calendar committee was to “address student concerns about starting so early in the academic year and impeding student opportunities to work and earn money,” she said.
As reported by CM Life earlier this week, the Student Government Association introduced new legislation Monday that would not support the academic calendar change scheduled in 2014. The legislation lists 38 reasons why the academic calendar change would be detrimental to the CMU student body.
“This legislation, if passed, will in my full confidence stop this from happening,” SGA President and Macomb junior Justin Gawronski told the SGA House on Monday. ”The SGA represents the near 27,000 students in the student body. We represent every student in this university. I think our voice is the most important voice on campus, and the university and the Academic Senate should recognize that.”
Frey said the academic calendar committee was also not charged with determining if the proposed academic calendar would affect the quality of academic programs. She said the committee just put together the structure for the calendar.
“The academic calendar committee never intended to have any of the work impede or reduce academic quality,” she said. “We did not address that topic nor did we see it as a concern.”
Frey said specific questions about the proposed academic calendar change can’t necessary be answered with sound bite responses.
Frey said she has worked in conjunction with Matt Serra, executive director of faculty and personnel services, and the year-and-a-half process regarding the proposed academic calendar change has been transparent.
“There has been no attempt to hide this,” she said.
Like us on Facebook
Recent Comments
- Hannah McCalister: I disagree with your statement. This was a great article and…
- Jason: Maybe it's just me, but I've never done anything this shorts…
- : no, this girl is insane. i went to high school with her. she…
- irish8517: While rate my professors is a valuable tool it should be tak…
- michmediaperson: Shapiro is wrong. Isn't RateMyProfessor, the report card st…
AD LINKS
• Is your baby graduating CMU? Place a personal greeting and photo in CM Life's Baby Graduates special pages. Download the form here
• Contact local movers in Mount Pleasant to help with all of your moving needs.
• Download Campus Cash Coupons!
• Search for local apartments
• Add your link here
3 Comments
“Students requested to pursue an academic calendar that started after
Labor Day so they would have more time to work over the summer, Frey
said. She said students raised concerns about being able to earn more
money to pay for their tuition.”
While some students may indeed want more summer time to earn more money for college expenses, what CMLife ascribes to Frey as a reason is not so! It was the FA which brought forward the issue of a change to the academic calendar on behalf of their faculty membership, using the rationale that the 16-week calendar is no longer consistent with other Michigan schools. It would be more “transparent” if FA leaders would admit that they advance the interests of faculty, not students. (It is faculty in their individual capacity who advocate for students, if at all.)
CMU faculty are unionized; their interests represented by their union. This is not necessarily a bad thing; and, generally, issues of all kinds are bargained to a mutually accepted conclusion. The CMU academic calendar is part of the collective bargaining process; something students have no control over or direct say into. As has been pointed out in regard to the issue of governance, it is the faculty who rightfully (and historically) ought to set the university’s academic agenda, and this would include the calendar. Unless the SGA thinks its influence will sway the FA leadership, (and when has the FA listened to the SGA…anyone remember the posting of SOS scores??) the 15-week calendar will be ratified as part of the collective bargaining process, which is really what Frey ought to have admitted.
The idea that this was a Faculty Association initiative is simply incorrect. When I was chair of the Academic Senate in 2010-11 and simultaneously co-chair of President Ross’s transition team, I became aware that the student leadership at that time felt strongly that starting the school year after Labor Day would benefit students. This item was included in the final report of the Student Priorities group that was part of the presidential transition. It was primarily this information, together with the knowledge that SOME faculty were unhappy with starting the school year two weeks before Labor Day (which we do in years when the holiday is ‘late’ -Sept. 4-7) due to child care issues and have expressed a desire to see CMU’s spring break aligned with the local schools’ spring break for the same reason, that prompted me as chair of the Senate to suggest that an ad hoc committee look at the calendar. This was done entirely through the Senate and I can say unequivocally that if the student opinion at that time had not been so strong, I would not have sought to have this considered by the Senate solely on the basis of the faculty opinion. It was the combination and my perception at the time that there was enough support for such a change to make it worth considering. The reason the FA is now involved is because the calendar is part of our contract so changes do have to be agreed to by
both sides. The 2011-2014 contract has a letter of agreement that IF the
Senate recommends a new calendar, the FA and CMU agree to negotiate adoption.
I find it funny that SGA thinks their resolution will stop this from happening. Everyone knows that SGA resolutions aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on. It’s also ironic that students want more time to earn money that will be spent on less educational time if this change is made.