On Wed., April 7, The Faculty Senate met to discuss the proposal of Plymouth State University transferring over to a four-credit academic system from the current three-credit model.
It became obvious very quickly that the faculty was torn on the issue. Provost Bernier was in favor of the switch while Dean Zehr was not. Some spoke in favor of it for the potentially reduced workload or intellectual benefits. Some spoke against it, saying that with the one additional credit taken per semester in a four-credit system, work for the faculty and student body would increase. Some of the faculty was simply undecided due to a lack of qualitative data proving either case.
One fact was made obvious both during the meeting and on the faculty website, was that the transition to a four-credit system would work for some departments and not others. Professor Chong noted that the Social Science department’s desire to move to a four-credit system was the catalyst for debate at hand. On the faculty blog, Linda Levy pointed out that athletic training, as well as biology, chemistry and other science programs already had four-credit courses and would actually be cutting content from courses if it were to make the switch. The art department successfully moved to a four-credit system on their own, free from the rest of the university.
It’s apparent; this would not work for all departments. While the discussion of this fundamental change is happening, maybe it should be taken in a new direction and look at the option of creating different schools for different departments. We could have a school of business, a school of science, a school of art, a school of meteorology, etc. Why not let each department decide which credit-system model works for them? Many universities have adopted this structure, including our sister university in N.H. higher education, UNH.
Why couldn’t we function like this? We as a university know for a fact that a switch would benefit some departments while immensely hindering others. Making this big change would truly be taking a grand step away from the liberal arts institution we are right now, even if a change of this magnitude took a few years to implement.
On the broader picture, we can make the switch to a four-credit system as long as we truly want to move in this direction as a university and give it the effort that it needs. On the faculty governance blog, Professor Scott Coykendall stated the key point that needs to be remembered when making our decision. He said: “If there are any measurable benefits to a four-credit model, surely they are dependent on effective implementation. If the new model would require additional resources, we should not only understand that we should have a clear commitment from the administration to provide those resources.” We can make the change if we want it, if the faculty and administration work together to get through the struggle that would take place should we decide to make the transition as a university to a four-credit system.
There is one thing that should be noted upon. Through the discussions and debates on the topic, the question has been brought up on whether or not the change would benefit the student body. To clarify, the student body is not a single thing or a single person. The student body is not like a plant that will thrive in one environment and wither and die in another. The student body is a group of individuals, and as the faculty so hastily pointed out that the four-credit system works for some departments and not for others, I will point out the same for the students of PSU. Some students will easily succeed with the more focused four-credit system, and some will prosper in the less focused three-credit system. Currently, some students even enroll in six courses each semester because they feel driven to keep up, thus finding the academic results they are looking for. Each individual will react differently and there is no decision the university can make that will benefit the student body as a whole.
~The Clock Staff