A new academic year, a new policy

Ah, what's not to love about a new school year? Foliage and fresh books, new clothes, new courses, and, as always, new academic policies. At the close of every semester, existing policies are tweaked to better accommodate students as they approach their degrees. And one particular policy is causing a considerable deal of discontent amongst faculty – the reconfigured Early Evaluation policy, better known as six-week grades.

The altered policy, which officially went into effect this semester, now requires that all students having earned 47 credits or fewer, the equivalent status of a second-semester sophomore, be given an evaluation of their performance in each class at the end of the first six weeks.

The motion to change the policy was brought to the faculty by the Academic Affairs Committee for the first time in March of this year. The original motion proposed that six-week evaluations be given to all students, but was not passed at the faculty meeting. Some faculty contested that, after six weeks, they simply haven't graded enough assignments to give their students a fair and accurate assessment of their performance. Furthermore, many professors thought the new policy would encourage too much "hand-holding," especially for the upper-level students. 

Ben DiZoglio, a senior English and Philosophy major, had spoken to a few faculty members about their take on the proposed motion. "Basically what I've gathered is that it's not about the amount of work it creates for them, but rather the message it sends to students."

In May, Dr. David Zehr and the Academic Affairs Committee presented a revised version of the motion to the faculty. This rendition proposed that six-week evaluations be given to all first-year and second-year students. The policy was not altered in respect to allowing only first-semester, first-year students to drop courses up to eight weeks into the semester. After these changes were made, the motion was approved. 

Dr. Zehr, the force behind this policy change, expressed why he felt the need for the change. "One thing that I do is examine existing polices and the ways that they benefit our students, or how they can be adjusted to become more beneficial." When asked what his and the committee's rationale was behind their call for change, he stated that they hoped it would result in more fruitful academic advising, ease of adjustment for first- and second-year transfer students to the University, and overall success for students new to college. "I think anyone would agree," he said, "that the first two years are crucial. I want to make sure that I'm doing everything I can to foster success for those two challenging yet vital years."