Inside the Crest

Legitimate representation demands clear and consistent communication between legislatures and their constituencies. Therefore, the recent polling program launched by the Student Government Association (SGA) and its senators regarding course credits should, in essence, be the rule and not the exception. We should, nevertheless, commend SGA for this relatively novel push toward increased communication and hope that it represents a harbinger of future efforts.
This past weekend, SGA deliberated at length the merits of recommending a change in the academic credit system. While the Senate tabled conversation till after full survey results were gathered, senators highlighted issues of GPA weight and the impact of a change in the credit system would have on science majors.
Conversations outside of the Senate highlight larger logistical and institutional roadblocks any motion to modify the credit system should expect to encounter. Private conversations with members of the faculty indicate senators will find themselves intentionally mired in an array of bureaucracy. A regulatory body will need to determine what merits an increase in course credits — how does extra time in a dance studio choreographing differ from time in a microbiology lab? — a delineation that certain departments will vigorously protest.
Perhaps the most Dickensian faculty response encountered so far is the suggestion that courses given 1.5 credits, thus the sciences and perhaps Chinese and Japanese, would need to increase the amount of workload by another 50 percent respectively. What these faculty members appear to utterly fail to realize that the increase would stem from the already disproportionate level of work demanded by their syllabi. Further increasing the demands of their courses defeats the resolutions purpose and, moreover, demonstrates a base disconnect between students and faculty in what should be considered reasonable expectations.
In light of such ideas, it may seem ironic and eventually damning to any credit increase resolution that the final decision rests with the faculty. Thankfully, it appears the majority of professors understand the compromises students must make when confronting particular departments.
In order to prevent this well-intended SGA initiative from encountering such perverse logic, senators and any administration allies must first take measures ensuring that affected faculty full understand that any course credit changes are not justification for a further increase in workload. It would do SGA further credit, and perhaps allay faculty fears of departmental marginalization, if GPA weight remained even across the board.