The City University of New York is currently undergoing an
overhaul of the undergraduate program starting in the Fall of 2013. (CUNY PATHWAYS
Initiative) The raison d’être of
this grand plan being applied capriciously across the board is the
simplification of students’ current curriculum track.
Pathways is touted as the new wave of academic learning at
the post-secondary level. It’s oft stated objective is to simplify the student
curriculum and to consolidate courses as a means to eliminating “unnecessary”
classes and letting students focus more on their intended career fields. An
added bonus from the University’s perspective is the reduction in class-time,
hence reducing payroll expenses. A side caveat of the new program in addition
to reduced classes is a heavier reliance on online courses, which remove the
need for; a) a present instructor, and b) the space and time that goes along
with it.
The normative view holds that this feature allows for more
student flexibility, thus insuring that more individuals have an opportunity of
obtaining a college education. I cannot help but discern that this is what was
meant when the president stated that his goal was for every American to go to
college. But the top-down approach favored by the executive branch is reflected
in the new directives thrust on the public CUNY system. And opposition has been
swift, with most originating from University faculty. College of Staten Island
professor Sandi Cooper for example, complains that, “As chair of the University
Faculty Senate — a body chartered by the Trustees — to deal with cross campus
curricula issues, I can state clearly that the process by which this core was
developed did not reflect any campus or university wide elections and
involvement of faculty with experience in general education. Our General Education committee which was
wrestling with a proposal to improve transfer and preserve much of what was
good in general education was ignored in the process of developing this common
core.” Another glaring sticking point is the economic hit that will fall
squarely on the labor side, and the relegating of whole academic departments as
expendable. Foreign languages, as well as other “liberal-arts” departments are
due to feel the brunt of the slashings. Lehman College Professor Pigliucci
concurs, stating that the new initiative “is being quickly rammed down the
throats of the faculty members at all CUNY Colleges, in blatant disregard of
faculty governance, interfering with curricula and the structure of majors, and
possibly resulting in the elimination or great reduction of entire departments,
mostly in the humanities (beginning with foreign languages, arts, assorted
studies programs, history, and philosophy).” (City
University of New York to turn into a glorified high school)
Faculty, both tenured and adjunct, has spoken up about the threats
posed to the education of hundreds of thousands of future students. For years
now, academic experts have warned about the dangers of foregoing a well-rounded
traditional education in the midst of an economic crisis. Indeed during harsh
financial times, there are often external and internal pressures for austerity
cuts in government spending and education is hardly an exception. So while
tuitions increase annually with little obstacle, whole departments are gutted
in a two-pronged approach of providing the most meager of its academic
responsibilities (almost shirking them) to its students while still being able
to accommodate for ever-larger increases in annual student enrollment.
Professor Cooper agrees with this assessment, “It is political when you realize
that most CUNY students arrive with severe deficits (two thirds of NYC high
school grads need remediation) and for most of us, this new core represents
little more than an effort to insure that more students get degrees by a far
less challenging curricula.”
Many faculty also say this is a ticket to disaster and worry
that in an effort to be more inclusive, what is actually taking place is the
watering down of academic standards. According to Dr. Philip A. Pecorino of Queensborough
Community College, “In effect, it makes too many CUNY graduates ‘second class
citizens’ in a competitive marketplace. And most of those so left behind, or at
lower points in their possible careers, will be…those already disadvantaged
with the weakest academic preparation and weaker in the Liberal Arts and
Sciences.” (The
Soft Bigotry of Lowered Expectations) He goes on to say that while the
stated purpose of the overhaul is to facilitate the easier transfer of credits
between schools, the real motive is “…to increase the rate of graduation
through a simplification of its curricula through their reformulation to offer
fewer required courses and fewer demanding courses…”
What can be ascertained is that there is more than one side
to this story. But in the mission of educating young people and preparing them
for an irresolute future, while also maintaining the fiscal solvency of institutions;
it is clear that battle lines are being drawn. CUNY Chancellor Matthew
Goldstein recently fired back in an email to the American Association of
University Professors (AAUP) against the objections to Pathways. He accuses
faculty and their representatives of being disingenuous in their claims which
he describes as “suspect in view of their opposition to numerous CUNY
initiatives over the past 14 years to improve academic standards.” Goldstein
even goes so far as to question the polling methods of the Professional Staff
Congress (PSC), “That poll could not meet even the most minimal professional
standards.” He also countered allegations that the process to implement Pathways
was undemocratic, stating. “The concepts of shared governance and academic
freedom are distinct.” Nevertheless, he states that full faculty participation
is merely a formality, and the bylaws of the CUNY Board of Trustees allow for
academic policy to be subject to them if necessary. Chancellor Goldstein
continues his counter-argument by stating that academic freedom “does not bar a
board of trustees from establishing policies concerning such academic matters
as transfer credits and general education requirements.”
As opposing sides both take the banner of protecting students
and with the pending lawsuit against Pathways being brought by the faculty
union, this fight looks to be drawn out with both sides digging in their heels.
We will follow closely and further discuss the issues as the storyline unfolds.
Below are some links that can be followed to hear some of
the issues being raised:
This has been posted by Gabriel Diaz, Clerical Assistant, LTLC
No comments:
Post a Comment