Fort Lewis College will restructure its curriculum to designate four-credit classes as three-credit classes. The change will take effect during the 2016 school year.
The 7-0 decision by the board of trustees Friday settled an issue that has divided the faculty for months. Students almost unanimously oppose the move.
FLC classes currently are split about evenly between three-credit and four-credit classes, which evolved during the past 20 or so years. The change will affect humanities and social sciences but have little effect on the pure sciences, business and teacher education.
Impassioned pleas and forceful arguments by opponents of the switch didn’t move trustees, four of whom were present in person, with three listening on a speaker phone.
Faculty members who want to keep the mix of classes said the administration has broken faith with professors over the widely accepted practice of shared governance in which faculty has primary responsibility for curriculum. Morale is on the skids because of what they said was a unilateral decision.
A varied curriculum is what’s needed at a liberal arts college, opponents said. It produces lively, engaged students, and four-credit classes lend breadth and depth to fields of study.
A change to three credits would scuttle many a program, requiring professors to start from scratch, they said.
At least two faculty members urged trustees to table their decision until their March meeting to allow faculty and administrators to mend their relationship and discuss the issues.
“Let’s take time instead of making an autocratic decision,” said Brian Burke, a professor of psychology, told trustees.
A suggestion to that end by trustee Peter Decker went nowhere. Administrators voiced opposition as did faculty senate president Chuck Riggs and Amy Wendland, the faculty representative to the board.
Wendland and Riggs said they are drained by the controversy because they have to represent pro and con forces among their colleagues.
Michele Malach, a professor of English and media studies, said later that faculty hopes were dashed.
“I was very disappointed,” Malach said. “We hoped they would table the issue so we could talk to trustees and administrators. It would be only another month.”
The lone faculty member to support the realignment of class credits was Ron Estler, a chemistry professor who arrived on campus in 1982. He said the faculty is responsible for the current state of affairs.
“I think this has been self-inflicted by the faculty by a flawed curricular process,” Estler said. “There have been thousands of proposed curricular changes, usually hundreds in a given year.”
Estler said that 100 percent of the proposals have been accepted with little to no challenge or revision, “an indicator to me of a system that is barely more than a revolving door.”
Wendland presented the result of a survey of faculty members eligible to vote on issues. Out of 163 eligible members, 124, or 76 percent, responded to a series of questions. She said:
Forty-one percent opposed the proposed curriculum change, with 59 percent spread over three levels of support.
Forty-three percent saw a negative impact on the ability of students to graduate in a timely manner, with the remainder seeing no impact or having a positive effect.
Fifty-one percent saw a negative impact on their ability to teach, with 49 percent seeing a positive impact.
Administrators said restructuring the curriculum is necessary to allow students to make seamless transfers between schools; to meet the demands of the Higher Learning Commission, its accrediting body; and to resolve internal conflicts such as scheduling.
The Department of Higher Education applauds the decision to return to a three-credit model, the deputy director of academic affairs said in a letter.
Campus spokesman Mitch Davis said it’s possible some classes will remain four-credit, but no decisions have been made.
At colleges and universities that are predominately three-credit institutions, four-credit courses tend to be in mathematics and languages, Davis said.
daler@duangoherald.com
