Subject: Group 17 Response to Question III
X-Sender: heldrichr@ashley.cofc.edu
To: GENED@cofc.edu
Errors-to: gened-error@cofc.edu
Reply-to: GENED@cofc.edu
As a preface to our answer to Question III, we would like to make the
following disclaimers.
(1) It should not be necessary for every goal to be manifest in every facet
of the College experience.
(2) Much of what already occurs on our campus as a means of reaching the
new goals is unstructured, unrecognized, and unacknowledged. These unsung
activities are vital to our survival.
(3) Much of what limits our institution as we struggle to met the new goals
is beyond the control of the faculty, students and staff. It rests more
squarely on the shoulders of the administration and Board (aka "they who
must be obeyed because they control space, enrollment, and allocation of
funds"). They must either follow by acknowledging our goals and
incorporating them into the campus master plan (vision, doctrine, whatever),
so we may work towards being our best by doing our best, or lead by setting
their own goals and telling us their vision enticing us to follow knowingly
and uniformly toward that end. We have wandered for too long and too far
down diverse paths without a firm idea of where we are headed and what we
want to become. While we must not forget our history, we can no longer rely
on it to guide us into the future.
Before engaging in protracted discussion and civil discourse, we
independently ranked each of the goals from best supported (score of 9) to
least supported (score of 1). With four participants the raw scores shown
below were obtained. The lowest possible raw score was 4, the highest 36.
We found these rankings representative of our view. The grades reported
(100 = unbeatable support) for our rankings were determined by dividing the
raw score by the maximum possible score (36) and multiplying the result by
100. The maximum possible grade was 100, the lowest was 11. A goal with a
raw score of 20, or a grade of 55.6 garners average support, a goal with a
grade below 50 is identified as needing attention. Our list is shown in
descending order by need of attention.
Goal # Grade Raw Score
9 22.2 8
3 30.6 11
2 38.9 14
7 52.8 19
5 61.1 22
6 66.7 24
8 66.7 24
4 69.4 25
1 91.7 33
We felt compelled to re-address Goal 9, which we so clearly perceived as
needing more support. Left out of our supported by list was the development
that occurs for many students in campus sororities/fraternities. Left out
of our not supported by list was the fact that only a small percentage of
students are part of sororities/fraternities; we do not have enough space on
campus for unstructured, casual, civil discourse; the developments of Goal 9
are limited to the classroom for those of our students who visit us rather
than call us home (i.e. commuters and part time students with full time jobs).
Goal 9 is challenging, but it is essential. As currently worded, it is not
measurable, and therefore not a goal. However, as a part of a liberal
education, it is indisputably important. We prefer our earlier statment of
this goal, which was as follows: "Throughout every student's career, the
College of Charleston community will affirm the foundational values of the
liberal arts, which are citizenship, civility, curiosity, honesty, and
tolerance." The wording is significant because of its implications. Our
goal statement does not promise to mold student character (they have to do
that for themselves) as the current GenEd goal implies. Rather, our goal
statement promises to the student that we will DEMONSTRATE values and give
students a chance to PRACTISE them. Both of these activities are
measurable. We should not imply or promise student adoption of particular
values. Nor can we promise long term retention of knowledge learned in a
classroom. However, we can, and should, promise that we will consistently
display civility and intellectual curiosity, that we will consistently
demonstrate our beliefs in honesty and tolerance, demonstrate our respect
for learning as a means of personal enlightenment and greater
self-determination, and demonstrate by example our belief that every
citizen, including us, can and should contribute to the common good. We
must not shrink from these basic values, or our work as educators becomes
pointless.
The importance of Goal 9 to the liberal education must be recognized in our
institutional mindset. Merit for demonstrating values and providing
students the practise ground must be expressed. Low student/teacher ratio,
space (even Socrates had a log) for student/teacher interaction outside of
the classroom in every discipline, extracurricular opportunities for
students with faculty involvement, faculty time to interact with students
outside of the classroom ... All of these are required, yet beyond our control.
We still remain ready to fulfill goal #9--in fact, we are already doing a
good job of fulfilling it--but the size of the student body, the teaching
ratios, the proliferation of nontenure track faculty, and the current reward
system have us rushing upon a parapet to thwart mediocrity. Our growth has
become metastatic, our actions antithetic to our goals. If we so decree,
more students can pay their money and receive credit hours. But if there
are not more faculty and space for the students and more time for us to
teach them both in and out of the classroom, then goal #9 is an ephemeral
thing which no curriculum change or funding formula can concretize. Space,
time and attention for every student, this should be our battle cry. The
walls have been breached and we do our students, the State and ourselves a
disservice with our growth. Our goals, like academic freedom and our
students' safety should be considered basic, non-negotiable requirements.