Letters to the Editor | Potential reduced teaching load problematic

In response to the article published on a 2:2 policy (“Task force looks into faculty course loads, 4.20.07), I have several concerns with points made by the Dean of Faculty and professors. First, while a discussion on faculty course load needs to take place amongst the faculty, I am upset that discussions which have been ongoing since the formation of the 2:2 task force have not included students who a change from 3:2 to 2:2 would directly affect.

Second, the decrease in faculty course load allegedly promises faculty members more time to commit to advising students and to academic research. However, without increasing the faculty to cover the one-fifth of courses lost to the shift, this promise does not seem feasible. Without increasing the faculty or decreasing the number of admitted students, class sizes for all courses would have to increase. Therefore, while a professor may be teaching one less course, he or she would likely still be teaching the same number of students and spending a significant amount of time assessing students’ performance (e.g. grading papers and exams). A reduction in faculty course load would only save the professor two or three class periods of lecture, which amounts to about 2.5 hours a week. The benefit of this does not nearly outweigh the cost of larger class sizes, or the financial impact that a smaller student body would have on the College.

Third, if the size of the faculty were to increase, the College might be unable to provide adequate office and/or research space to accommodate additional faculty. Across campus, office space and research space, especially in the sciences, are extremely limited. While a shift to 2:2 would ideally make Vassar a more competitive employer, if 2:2 were to begin in the next six or seven years before the new science facility or any additional facilities are built, a lack of office space and research space may significantly deter potential faculty from working at Vassar. This would offset the College’s goal to attract top-notch professors.

Lastly, students need to be aware of other changes faculty are discussing. In order to implement 2:2, the College may consider a reduction in graduation requirements from 34 to 32 units and canceling all courses with five or less students enrolled. If the College’s goal is to maintain the level of education that Vassar is providing, reducing the number of graduation requirements, removing all under-enrolled courses, and increasing class size do not reflect a commitment to the educational standards the College currently holds.

For these reasons, students need to be informed on these issues, and we need to ensure that the decision is not made without student input. Many students decide to come to Vassar because of small class sizes, in addition to the promise of a strong education and professors committed to providing just that. The Dean of Faculty and the Administration need to include students in these discussions to ensure that this change is supported by the whole College, including the student body, prior to making the final decision, which lie with President Catharine Bond Hill, Dean of Faculty Ronald Sharp, and the trustees.

—Lilian Ho ’07