Provost nixes plan to alter U. calender

SCUE angry over decision Students complaining about having only three reading days this semester will have to deal with the same situation next year. Despite the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education's efforts to increase reading days and change the number of days in each semester, Provost Stanley Chodorow rejected the proposed calendar last week. Chodorow made the decision at the Council of Undergraduate Deans meeting on Wednesday. SCUE chairperson Matthew Kratter said he was "unhappy" with the decision. "We're very disappointed with the process and the final outcome," the Engineering senior said last night. Kratter cited problems with the methods used to arrive at the decision. He said Chodorow focused on the general faculty's opinion, rather than taking into account last year's approval of the plan by both the Faculty Senate and the University Council. "The Provost's Office asked the deans to ask their faculty directly if they would approve of the calendar modifications," Kratter said. "There was no opportunity for debate or discussion with the faculty who wouldn't initially agree with the changes. "The provost never really sat down and considered input from all of the groups," he added. "If I knew he would consider the faculty populous vote as the final judge, we would have handled this in a different way." Chodorow said last night that the process "led to the rejection of SCUE's proposal," but added that he thought the procedure was "proper." "I am not prepared to say that it was an incorrect or improper procedure," he added. "I inherited the procedure of consulting the deans and faculties of the undergraduate schools [from interim Provost Marvin Lazerson]." Kratter said the plan's approval by "two University-wide bodies" should have provided adequate reason to "push the approval of this program forward." And Undergraduate Assembly Chairperson and Wharton junior Dan Debicella said he was "very upset" with the decision, especially because the endorsement from the two organizations "was ignored." Executive Assistant to the Provost Linda Koons said last year's support for the plan was not forgotten. "It was considered very seriously," she said. Chodorow said the vast majority of faculty in opposition to the proposal led to his rejection of the plan. "The SCUE proposal was rejected because the deans and faculty of the four undergraduate schools were overwhelmingly against it," he added. "SCUE viewed its proposal as a simple matter; it is not simple. "I was neither for it or against SCUE's proposal," Chodorow said. SCUE's plan for the 1995-1996 University calendar included four reading days attached to a weekend during each semester. The number of teaching days in the fall semester would increase from 64 to 67, while the spring semester's teaching days would decrease from 70 to 69. Originally, the proposal equalized the two semesters at 67 days apiece. But the Faculty Senate expressed concern, so the proposal was amended. The plan would force classes to begin before Labor Day and Kratter said the faculty may be against this. "That is not necessarily popular," he said, comparing the issue to a decision on tuition hikes. "If you send it to the masses, you'll come up with a resounding 'no.' " Debicella voiced similar sentiments, saying he hopes "it's not because the faculty doesn't want to come here before Labor Day." But Koons said August summer programs and classes were factors in the faculty's decision. Many summer programs would lead immediately into the proposed start of classes, thereby giving the faculty no break between the summer sessions and the fall semester. Chodorow said the summer programs presented the "compelling argument against SCUE's proposal." "[The plan] would interfere with important academic programs currently offered by two of the schools," Chodorow said, referring to the Wharton School and the School of Nursing. Debicella said he plans to discuss the issue at the December University Council meeting. Kratter said the decision affects the student body the most. "The students will be the ones who suffer and SCUE is not happy with that," he said. "The process was so vague and so unclear and so flawed that I don't know what more we could have done, although I am certainly unhappy that we didn't produce this for the students." Chodorow said although increasing reading days would be "nice," he is "not prepared to ignore the views of the faculty to accomplish this goal." He added that faculty have suggested taking out fall break from the calendar to accommodate the added days, an idea which SCUE is against.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.