Dialogue, debate at SCUE, UA forum

Students engaged in a heated discussion last night about educational issues at Penn during the first joint event between the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education and the Undergraduate Assembly in several years.

What started as an open discussion on educational policies at Penn ended in a debate on the merits of SCUE's methodology in dealing with the student body.

College senior Jesse Salazar said he thought that SCUE needed to be more accountable to the overall student population.

"SCUE has been in its own little bubble," he said.

Other students said that they felt as though they were being ignored in their quest to implement the United States Cultural Analysis Requirement, which aims to encourage students to consider different U.S. minority perspectives in their education.

One proponent of the cultural analysis requirement attempted to bring up the issue during the discussion but was told by SCUE chairwoman and College junior Samantha Springer that the open forum was not designed "to be a debate or a heated discussion."

Despite the anger of a few attendees, College senior and UA chairman Jason Levine said that student government is "always trying to reach out to undergraduate students."

During the first portion of the meeting, the attendees split into five small groups to discuss issues of teaching and learning, interdisciplinary studies, research, advising and the college house system.

In each group, a secretary recorded the students' comments. This feedback will be compiled into a formal document known as the White Book, which will be released by SCUE in January or February.

The White Book is an internal document of what SCUE has been working on for the past five years about what the student government branch plans to do for the next five years, according to Springer.

There were multiple suggestions made by students during the town hall, each geared towards making the most of a Penn education.

In regards to teaching and learning, Nursing senior Katie Clarkson, suggested establishing "a big brother-big sister program where upperclassmen could talk to you about courses [they took]. If someone is passionate about a topic, they could help others."

Looking beyond helping students become more familiar with the courses at Penn, other students suggested that a greater understanding of faculty research should be promoted.

"Students should be encouraged to see what teachers are researching," College junior Jason Oberman said.

Even though Penn is a research institution, Wharton junior and UA member Sean Walker said, "It may be better [for professors] to focus more on teaching than research."

Interdisciplinary studies at Penn also brought about much debate. UA members asked those in attendance to discuss whether or not departments or schools should collaborate to coordinate academic offerings.

UA member Brendan Darrow, a College sophomore, thought that possibly a dual major of history and political science could be constructed, since these fields can be closely related.

Still, some students said that each school's separate admissions policy may impede the development of interdisciplinary offerings.

Wharton freshman Julian Astley asked why Penn limited the number of students accepted into dual-degree programs when "we're all Penn students, and Penn is trying to encourage this interdisciplinary learning."

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