|
|
|
Upcoming Society for the College Board of Directors Meetings
July 27, 2013 - Northern Virginia
October 26, 2013 - Williamsburg, VA - 10:00 a.m.
*Some dates and times are tentative, contact info@societyforthecollege.org for more information
Campus Discussion: "A Curriculum Worthy of William and Mary?"
"A Curriculum Worthy of William and Mary?: Reactions to the New Faculty Proposal"
On Monday, April 22, 2013, the Society convened a panel at the Sadler Center to discuss reactions to the proposed new curriculum.
A full video of the event can be seen on YouTube.
PANELISTS:
Mark Bauerlein, Professor of English at Emory University, Author of “The Dumbest Generation”
Pete Snyder, Member of the W&M Board of Visitors, CEO of Disruptor Capital
Josh Gert, Professor of Philosophy, College of William & Mary
Berhanu Abegaz, Professor of Economics and Director of Africana Studies, College of William & Mary
*Click here for event flyer
June 5, 2013
Vince Haley: "A Core Curriculum With No Core"
The Virginia Gazette published an essay by Society for the College Board Member Vince Haley '88 regarding faculty reaction to the proposed new College curriculum. He writes:
Last week at a curriculum forum held in William and Mary’s Sadler Center, Professor Mark Bauerlein of Emory University said that what struck him about the college’s proposed new liberal arts core curriculum was “the awfully thin or absent research case for this proposal.”
Weeks earlier, at a Faculty of Arts & Sciences meeting where professors approved the general principles of the new curriculum, William and Mary Physics Professor John Delos was more pointed. He called the proposed new core curriculum “the weakest in my memory, and possibly the weakest in the history of the college.” Delos has taught at the college since 1971.
Read the whole piece here.
Feb. 6, 2013
W&M Needs a Curriculum to Match its Reputation
Update: Click here for Society member and W&M alumnus Matt Ames’ reaction to the faculty vote
As any employer knows, earning a William and Mary diploma speaks volumes of the person whose name is on it: she or he has drive and intelligence that's unmatched among other recent graduates. That is why the Society for the College strongly opposes the proposed changes to the undergraduate curriculum recommended by William & Mary’s faculty on February 5. The Society recognizes that the faculty curriculum committee has devoted much time, thought, and energy to the proposal, but the Board of Visitors must reject the plan because it would drive down the quality of education at W&M.
The faculty committee got one thing right: the current General Education Requirements, or “GERs,” are inadequate. The undergraduate curriculum at the College does need reform. Regrettably, the faculty proposal would merely substitute its own inadequacies for those of the current system.
The flaws in the proposal are too numerous to list comprehensively, but they arise from a misplaced emphasis on interdisciplinary study, a desire to promote “global relevance,” and an unwillingness to establish and enforce concrete standards. In the end, the faculty proposal offers less substance, less rigor, and greater expense.
Less Substance
Rather than taking a stand on the hard question of what specific knowledge a student should acquire at William & Mary, the faculty believes it is sufficient to expose students to different “ways of knowing.” The faculty proposal centers on five courses, built largely around broad, as-yet unknown, interdisciplinary themes. Students also would be required to earn two credits in each of three academic “domains,” and participate in various vaguely-defined colloquia or honors projects in the third and fourth years.
Despite its many flaws, the current GER system at least requires students to take courses in seven specific areas, thus ensuring exposure to specific knowledge in those areas, as well providing breadth across the curriculum. The chief problem with the GERs is that they are too broad: so many courses qualify that the curriculum loses all coherence and commonality. The faculty proposal does nothing to address these problems – indeed, the focus on interdisciplinary learning makes it even more diffuse and less specific.
Under the faculty proposal, students would be able to graduate from W&M without taking a single course in history or literature of any kind; without taking a course in English composition; with no knowledge of economics; and no requirement to study a laboratory science. Students might be exposed to material in some of these areas, but only if they seek them out specifically or they accidentally select the right interdisciplinary courses. Aside from retaining the existing requirements for proficiency in math and foreign language, which most students actually meet with credits earned in high school, the faculty has concluded that students do not have to actually know anything in particular.
In addition, the five key courses would mostly be taken in the first two years, before students have developed any real expertise or knowledge in any subject. Most undergraduates – especially freshman and sophomores – simply don’t have the knowledge to benefit from interdisciplinary work. After all, they have barely begun to master a single discipline. Rather than thinking for themselves, seeing their own connections, and drawing their own inferences, they will be instructed by professors in what to think, exactly the opposite of what the faculty intends.
Less Rigor
The faculty proposes, in effect, to reduce the demands on students. The current and proposed systems are difficult to compare, because the faculty proposal relies on a number of colloquia and other vaguely-defined requirements that do not qualify as traditional three-credit courses. But it is very clear that students would spend less time in class under the faculty’s plan.
Under the current system, students must take a total of 11 full courses (by “full” we mean three credit hours or more), plus an additional two credits in the creative and performing arts. This includes the GER requirements, and the freshman seminar. The new proposal, however, would require only five full courses, plus various colloquia and other requirements. Furthermore, many of the latter could apparently be met with less intensive two-credit courses, although some might actually be met with traditional three-credit classes.
In terms of credit hours, the disparity is less apparent, but still significant. Today, students must earn 37 credits to meet the general education requirements (again including a freshman seminar), but under the new proposal they would only have to earn 30. In traditional terms, this amounts to roughly a 20% reduction in class time.
In reality, class time could be even further reduced, because the faculty is surreptitiously promoting what can only be called “credit inflation.” Some universities have adopted a four-course student load, in which students take four four-credit courses per semester, rather than the five three-credit courses that has long been the standard at W&M. In its present form, the faculty proposal does not overtly advocate such a change, but earlier iterations did, and the final proposal clearly indicates a desire to move in that direction. The five required courses would each carry four credits, and the proposal makes clear that there is no necessary correlation between increased credit hours and time spent in the classroom. In other words, the assignment of four hours to the new courses is essentially arbitrary. With respect to other courses, the proposal states that “departments may determine that a four-credit standard is appropriate,” while others may not. How long will it be before the first department decides it is “appropriate”? Can there be any doubt that in the end students will get more credits for less effort, students and faculty will spend less time in the classroom, and students, parents and taxpayers will get less value for their money?
Greater Expense
To oversee the new curriculum, the faculty proposal calls for the creation of a new administrative center. While billed as an expansion of the existing writing center, additional staff, space and therefore funding would surely be requested. Rising administrative costs in higher education – especially in relation to faculty salaries and tuition increases – have become a matter of national discussion in recent years, and for very good reason.
Having proposed our own alternative curriculum proposal, which would require substantial changes in the structure of the faculty if adopted, we understand the complexity of what the faculty is trying to do. Any significant reform will undoubtedly require staffing changes. But the College is not in a position to assume new overhead costs. Even if new resources are available, they should be devoted directly to faculty compensation. It must be possible to construct a coherent curriculum without hiring additional administrators.
* * *
William & Mary has long had a reputation for academic rigor, and for giving parents and students good value for their money. The grade inflation of recent years at the College has already put W&M’s reputation for rigor at risk. Adopting a weaker curriculum will only harm that reputation further. The Society for the College urges the Board of Visitors to reject any proposal that does not preserve academic standards and the value of a William & Mary diploma. We hope that the College will initiate a new reform effort designed to ensure that every William & Mary graduate has the knowledge needed to assume a position of prominence and leadership in American society.
Jan. 30, 2013
Alumni, Stakeholders Speak Out Against Watering Down Academic Requirements at W&M
In the past few weeks members of the William and Mary community and other stakeholders have spoken out against proposed core curriculum changes, or COLL, which the Faculty of Arts & Sciences will consider on February 5.
Thomas Lipscomb, Class of '61, says the COLL's adoption would benefit "those faculty members who hate teaching basics like math, science, and composition and prefer the freedom of play/pretend interdisciplinary and globaloney research games with students they don’t want to be bothered to prepare."
Nick Fitzgerald, Class of '09, says it might be better for the College's curriculum committee to reform current General Education Requirements "and provide more pointed improvements to the current system, rather than scrapping it entirely in favor of a grossly deficient one."
Greg Lewin, American Council of Trustees and Alumni program officer for curricular reform, says COLL "erodes what is now intact and further dilutes what were already overly broad requirements in the humanities and social sciences. ...if it passes, the education of W&M students for years to come is on the line."
Edward A. Watkins, Class of ’56, on how the curriculum proposals fail to include a history requirement at the second-oldest college in the country: "William & Mary’s location and its unique and direct connection to this nation’s creation should be the foundation upon which it builds."
Susan Eley, BA ’57, MA ’62 and Society secretary, says with COLL W&M would be "following a trend to move away from a solid core curriculum even though the American people realize the importance of a strong educational foundation."
Karla Kraynak Bruno, Class of '81, says faculty should recalibrate the curriculum redesign to showcase "William & Mary’s most cherished asset and unique selling point: American history."
Matt Ames, Class of '80 and father of a current W&M student and two recent graduates of the College, says proposed changes make matters worse “by replacing the scattershot GER requirements with a new set of ill-defined interdisciplinary courses.”
Jan. 26, 2013
Feb. 5 Faculty Vote Holds W&M Academic Future in the Balance
In less than two weeks the Faculty of Arts and Sciences will consider whether or not to endorse a major overhaul to the William and Mary’s core undergraduate curriculum requirements. Unfortunately, the proposal designed by the Curriculum Review Steering Committee is deeply flawed, and would be a major step back. The "College Curriculum" proposal, or COLL, water downs academics at the College of William and Mary by:
- Allowing faculty and students to teach and take what they want rather than strengthening existing academic requirements. The COLL system is touted for having "more flexibility," requiring "far fewer courses"...relative to the current system," and for not being "overly demanding in the junior and senior years."
- Omitting a specific writing requirement, at a time when many college-bound students are poorly prepared to write.
- Failing to mandate that students take a history course - at the second-oldest institution of higher education in the United States.
- Only requiring a single course in scientific and quantitative reasoning.
- Cutting required classes by about half and credit hours by one third relative to current undergraduate curriculum requirements.
The Society favors curriculum changes that would improve the rigor and rich liberal arts traditions that have defined William and Mary. The Society provided input to the faculty steering committee throughout its yearlong review, hosting three on-campus discussions on curriculum reform in addition to publishing its own comprehensive curriculum reform white paper.
Following the faculty vote, the Board of Visitors, the governing body for the College, will have final approval. The society encourages members of the William and Mary Community and other stakeholders to reach out to BOV to oppose a watering down of the College’s basic education requirements:
bov@wm.edu
COLL Executive Summary, Schedule and Other Recent Curriculum Reform Documents:
In November, the College’s Curriculum Review Steering committee issued a year-end Executive Summary on its undergraduate curriculum proposal, the "College Curriculum," or COLL. The summary is viewable here.
On February 5 the Faculty of Arts and Sciences will vote on the COLL framework. Take a look at the schedule of committee’s work since November leading up to the faculty vote.
Curriculum committee explanations on COLL 300 and 400 - courses students would take in their junior and senior years - to the Arts & Sciences faculty.
Fall 2012 report on the resources needed to implement curriculum proposal.
April 2010 summary of principles for liberal arts leadership at the College, a starting point from the administration in developing the COLL.
Nov. 6, 2012
Society will be a stakeholder as W&M community prepares for new presidential selection process
"The search process often screens out, from the start, individuals who can think critically about their institutions, challenge the conventional wisdom of their constituents, and create new paradigms in education."
–Clara Lovett, “The Dumbing Down of College Presidents”
In April 2012 the Board of Visitors extended the contract of College President Taylor Reveley through June 2015. Although Reveley’s remaining time at the William and Mary is uncertain, in advance of his retirement and the subsequent search for a new president, the Society intends to be a voice for community engagement and transparency.
Too often colleges and universities aren’t prepared to search for new president, but William and Mary should not follow this path. Members of the BOV, administration and other members of the William and Mary community can be ready in advance of Reveley’s departure. A big help to that end is the American Council of Trustees and Alumni’s “Selecting a New President: What to do Before You Hire a Search Firm,” a report that outlines different ways institutions of higher education should prepare for and conduct their presidential searches.
Much can be done before a president retires, as with reviewing existing presidential selection processes. Members of the BOV could take action now to modify procedures that need updating, for example. A presidential search also presents a good opportunity to think about the ways that a new president can help meet the school’s goals.
There are also many pitfalls to avoid. A presidential search committee should define what the leadership qualities that are a good fit for the College before a vacancy is advertised, for example, while close attention should also be paid to the selection of an outside search firm. A wrong search firm can easily undercut a the presidential search process by promoting candidates wedded to the higher ed status quo over the best interests of the College.
William and Mary deserves exceptional leadership that will build up the College, while recognizing that the school is already exceptional. Therefore, careful and strategic consideration should be given to a search. The Society intends to remain watchful and assist as appropriate in the College community's interests in the coming presidential search.
Sept. 11, 2012
How to get smart as a W&M donor: Read ACTA’s “Intelligent Donor’s Guide to College Giving”
“Money is like water. It doesn’t matter how much you pour in at the top of the bucket if it is leaking out the bottom.” -A rural American saying
Ever wonder how your gift to the College is being spent? The American Council of Trustees and Alumni has laid out useful information to consider in its “Intelligent Donor's Guide to College Giving.” The Society encourages William and Mary alumni to consult the guide to get smart as a donor before giving money to the school. The guide shows that intelligent donors are:
- Selective. Identify the best programs or activities offered to direct funds toward. Schools at times will free up funds after donations that will go to programs you might not intend to support. Intelligent donors carefully consider what they care about and invest in their own values.
- Examine the realities. Alumni may be shocked to know what is happening today on campus and should first take a look before making donations. It’s important to contribute to programs that will help the College maintain a standard of excellence.
- Read the mission statements of departments. Does the department you want to donate to actually set valid educational goals, or does it focus more on social engineering? Course descriptions in the school’s catalogue might sound reasonable, but try to obtain syllabi first. They may be difficult to obtain, but will show what is actually being taught. (Slyllabi can at times be found on the internet, at the college book store or by calling professors or department offices.)
For further guidance contact: American Council of Trustees and Alumni (202) 467-6787
August 23, 2012
EVMS Merger a Once in a Lifetime Opportunity for W&M
The Society for the College strongly supports the ongoing exploration of a joint partnership between the College of William and Mary and Eastern Virginia Medical School. In short, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity, offering William and Mary the chance to acquire a medical school instead of building one from the ground up.
Provided necessary measures are taken to join the two institutions in a manner that protects the interests of each, there are a number of potential benefits.
Most of William and Mary’s peer colonial colleges, including Harvard University, Yale University, the University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, Brown University and Dartmouth College have medical schools. Undergraduate science and pre-med courses are traditionally strong at William and Mary, and a medical school would strengthen the undergraduate curriculum while complementing those courses of study for graduating students.
Additionally, a joint partnership would enhance ongoing research collaborations between the two institutions. A joint clinical psychology program between the College and EVMS, for example, started in 1978, just five years after EVMS was founded.
EMVS is on a strong financial footing with a 2011 operating surplus and an in-place faculty, while the institution does not run a hospital - a fiscal drag for many medical schools. Additionally, such a partnership, as was noted by the Daily Press, could be a boon for the greater Hampton Roads economy.
The distance between EVMS and Williamsburg is largely irrelevant in this day and age of advanced telecommunications and distance learning. For example, the University of Virginia has a successful college at Wise, in far southwest Virginia, and satellite campuses in six locations around the state, including one in Hampton Roads. Moreover, the College has been adept at governing distant schools. The Virginia Institute of Marine Science is a strong part of William and Mary located in Gloucester, Va. The William and Mary Board of Visitors also governs Richard Bland College located in Petersburg, Va. Old Dominion University in Norfolk was originally founded and governed by the College, as one of the "Colleges of William and Mary."
Many institutions have strong science and technology graduate programs. These programs spur grant dollars and opportunities for public-private partnerships, as well as exciting opportunities for students. Fields of study in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics can be a bigger part of the College, to its overall benefit. For the sake of William and Mary's science and technology future, EVMS is a chance we should strongly consider.
July 11, 2012
William and Mary among worst public schools on grade inflation, study shows
The average GPA for William and Mary students has markedly risen in recent years, according to data compiled by retired Duke University professor and higher ed watchdog Stuart Rojstaczer.
In 1986, the average GPA of William and Mary’s graduating class was 2.86, while by 2005 that average had risen to 3.23. More recent data is likely to have shown an exacerbation of this trend. From 1990 to 2006, Rojstaczer's research shows William and Mary as one of the biggest users of grade inflation among public colleges.
Average GPA for William and Mary's graduating class, 1986-2005: http://gradeinflation.com/Williamandmary.html
Changes in GPA among public schools, 1990-2006: http://gradeinflation.com/figure4new.gif
Rojstaczer's comprehensive study of university GPAs: http://gradeinflation.com
May 16, 2012
"CBS This Morning" Interviews W&M Chancellor in the Wren Building
Today "CBS This Morning" aired an interview between Emmy Award-winning co-host Charlie Rose and former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates '65, L.H.D. '98, who last weekend was on campus to take part in Commencement activities. The interview, which was filmed in the historic Wren Building, covers international affairs and the Navy SEAL raid in which Osama Bin Laden was killed. During the interview, Rose notes that W&M is the second-oldest university in the country and "full of history."
Gates was invested as W&M Chancellor in February, replacing former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and adding to a long line of distinguished individuals, including Henry Kissinger, Margaret Thatcher, and Warren Burger.
Watch the full interview at CBS.
Faculty Committee Proposal a Setback for W&M Curriculum
Read the Curriculum Review Steering Committee's Year-End Report HERE
Read the Feb. 27 Curriculum Review Steering Committee document HERE
Read reactions from Susan Eley, B.A. '57, M.A. '62; Karla Bruno '81; Interim Dean of Arts & Sciences Eugene Tracy; Hampton University professor emeritus John Alewynse; Elizabeth Gibbons, M.A. '71; and W&M physics professor John Delos (.docx download).
The Williamsburg Yorktown Daily has more on the proposed requirements.
The College of William and Mary is on the verge of taking a big step in the wrong direction on basic undergraduate curriculum requirements.
William and Mary’s Curriculum Review Steering Committee, a panel constituted in December 2010 to examine the school’s undergraduate curriculum requirements, has prepared a yet-undisclosed overhaul to the school’s basic education requirements. The proposal, a draft of which is linked to above, scraps the College’s current General Education Requirements system, replacing it with watered-down core college curriculum system, or COLL. The Society for the College is concerned that this proposal is geared toward allowing faculty and students to teach and take what they want rather than boosting academic requirements. The committee touts the COLL system for having "more flexibility," requiring "far fewer courses"...relative to the current system," and for not being "overly demanding in the junior and senior years."
The proposal lacks a specific writing requirement; fails to mandate that students take a history course; and would only require a single course in scientific and quantitative reasoning. These are among several changes that would setback the school’s current curriculum standards, and are far from improving the rigor and rich liberal arts traditions that have defined William and Mary - traditions that the Society wants to bolster.
If enacted, the COLL system would cut required classes by about half and credit hours by one third relative to current undergraduate curriculum requirements.
Furthermore, at a time of heightened attention on higher education spending, the proposal raises questions about university administrative expenses by creating a new curriculum center. According to a recent report by the American Council for Trustees and Alumni, the College raised tuition by 49 percent from 2004 through 2011 while increasing administrative costs by 61 percent and only raising instructional spending by 42 percent from 2002 to 2009.
The Society has provided input to the faculty steering committee throughout its yearlong review, hosting three on-campus discussions on curriculum reform in addition to publishing its own comprehensive curriculum reform white paper. In the Society’s third event, which was held on March 14, members of the College administration and the curriculum committee were invited to present their findings on the status of College curriculum reform. The Society is concerned that the faculty and administration declined to participate, and that such a refusal runs counter to basic accountability and transparency.
In anticipation of a faculty vote on the new curriculum requirements at the start of the 2012-2013 academic year, the Society encourages alumni and anyone with a love for William and Mary to contact the school’s Board of Visitors, President Taylor Reveley and members of the steering committee to tell them what you think about this proposal to water down William and Mary's mandatory academic requirements.
... Read More ...
March 24, 2012
Society for the College: Big Disconnect at W&M
By Andrew McRoberts
Note: The following letter appeared in the March 24 edition of The Virginia Gazette.
The College of William & Mary is at an academic and fiscal crossroads.
If the Board of Visitors agrees with a faculty committee, the basic curriculum or General Education Requirements (GERs) would be scrapped in favor of a new approach with half as many required classes and one-third fewer credit hours.
The specific course requirements across the liberal arts spectrum would be weakened. Future W&M students could be able to graduate by taking no more than four courses per semester. The faculty committee touts its proposal as having "more flexibility," requiring "far fewer courses ...relative to the current [GER] system,"and for not being "overly demanding in the junior and senior years." (See www.SocietyfortheCollege.org.)
In contrast, the Society for the College proposes that the GERs be strengthened. At the top of our suggestions, we call for more focused writing composition and history requirements.
The faculty committee’s proposal does nothing to enhance the college’s academic reputation and its tradition of rigorous liberal arts curriculum. And it calls for a new Curriculum Center at a time when the university faces fiscal shortfalls. These are good reasons to raise questions about the proposal.
When parents, alumni and donors of the Society have sought to raise questions, the faculty committee, interim dean of Arts & Sciences, and provost have said that the curriculum is a faculty concern. When invited by the Society for the College to share or discuss the proposal at a public discussion held on campus, all have been too busy or simply declined. In no uncertain terms, all have said W&M’s curriculum is none of the public’s business.
Leave it to the faculty.
At the same time, the college is pursuing a "new financial model." Given the drop in state support, President Reveley has explained that this is needed to prevent a further slide in our national ranking because of a lack of financial resources. The college must rely less on state support and more on gifts and development from alumni and other donors, along with other sources of revenue.
See the disconnect?
On the one hand, the college says the curriculum is not an issue that concerns the alumni, donors and friends of the university. On the other, the college seeks the donations that come from an engaged and involved public.
Key questions: Are the academic requirements of the college solely the province of the faculty? Does the college want the public engaged or not? The Society for the College says to let all interested stake holders be involved.
In the past, the curriculum has been largely left to faculty members, who still must have a significant say in what they teach. But given the fiscal crossroads the college faces, it is critical that the alumni, donors, parents and public be involved in something so core to the institution’s future.
Public preferences for academic rigor and the needs of future employers and American society must be taken into account. Alumni, parent and donor desires regarding W&M’s academic reputation must be given weight, even as they are solicited to support.
If the college is to be successful, there can be no disconnect. All stakeholders must be engaged and solicited.
Andrew R. McRoberts ’87 is president of the Society for the College. He practices law in Richmond.
March 20, 2012
VA Informer: W&M's GER Revision Criticized by Alumni Organization
By Luke Nicastro
On Wednesday, March 14, the Society for the College held an open panel discussion on the future of William & Mary's core liberal arts curriculum. The Society for the College is an independent 501 (c) organization dedicated to promoting good governance, preserving history and tradition, and fostering academic excellence at William & Mary. Comprised of alumni, faculty, students, and friends, the Society attempts to serve as a voice for what it perceives as the interests of the greater William & Mary community.
Debate over those interests formed the basis of Wednesday's panel discussion, which saw presentations from three representatives of the Society – Anne Neal, President of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni; Matt Ames '80, attorney; and W&M Professor Paul Davies. These presentations revolved around the College's current effort to redesign its core curriculum, and featured trenchant criticism of both current and proposed general education requirements (GERs).
... Read more ...
March 21, 2012
VA Gazette: Untenured Professors Make Up Half the Faculty
By Susan Robertson
In a slowly evolving trend, the College of William & Mary is employing more adjunct instructors who are ineligible for tenure.
Adjuncts cost less and pose no long-term financial or political burden. W&M officials insist they’re hired for their professionalism, not just savings.
For some years, half the staff have been adjuncts, according to a report issued to the Faculty Assembly last month by Provost Michael Halleran. That reflects a national trend over more than three decades of colleges exploiting non-tenured instructors for significantly lower salaries and benefits.
Tenured faculty now make up 49.3% of the faculty.
... Read More ...
March 16, 2012
The Flat Hat: Rearranging the books
By Ken Lin
The College of William and Mary may have educated Presidents of the United States in the past, but a panel involved with higher education, organized by the Society for the College, indicated that the College’s current curriculum fails to prepare graduates to be the nation’s future leaders.
The panel’s featured speaker, American Council of Trustees and Alumni President Anne Neal, spoke about the Council’s recent finding that a staggering proportion of college graduates failed to learn anything in college, and many took courses that required little writing and composition. Neal decried the fact that so many recent college graduates in the United States remain unemployed or underemployed, tying the phenomenon to a failure of universities to provide them with the necessary and practical skills that would allow them to be productive members of society.
... Read More ...
The Virginian-Pilot: Following ACTA Study, Major Grant-Giving Foundation Seeks Curriculum Reforms
Grant-giving group finds Virginia colleges lacking
By Janie Bryant
© The Virginian-Pilot February 17, 2012
PORTSMOUTH
For more than half a century, the Beazley Foundation has invested millions of dollars into college-bound students and the Virginia colleges and universities they attend.
Last year, the foundation's trustees commissioned a study to check on their investment. What they learned troubled them.
... Read More ...
Forbes: Executives say new grads ill-prepared for job market
FORTUNE -- Note to recent college grads and the Class of 2012: You may not be as ready for the working world as you think you are. At least, that's the opinion of about 500 senior managers and C-suite executives in a study by Global Strategy Group, on behalf of worldwide architectural firm Woods Bagot.
In all, a 65% majority of business leaders say young people applying for jobs at their companies right out of college are only "somewhat" prepared for success in business, with 40% of C-suite executives saying they are "not prepared at all." Not only that, but even those who get hired anyway may not rise very far. Almost half (47%) of C-suite executives believe that fewer than one-quarter (21%) of new grads have the skills they'll need to advance past entry-level jobs.
... Read More ...
W&M Disappoints on Core Academic Requirements, Affordability in New Study
In a timely release to the Society’s own core curriculum recommendations for the College of William and Mary, the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) has published a report outlining challenges in general education requirements, cost effectiveness and governance at Virginia’s 39 public and private four-year institutions. The report, 'The Diffusion of Light and Education," is ACTA’s ninth in a series of state evaluations.
The College came up short on four of the seven criteria ACTA evaluated. On undergraduate course requirements, the College only requires three of seven key subjects - foreign language, math, and science are mandated while composition, literature, U.S. government or history, and economics aren’t necessary to graduate. These shortcomings further highlighted ACTA’s annual ranking studies of major colleges and universities, "What Will They Learn?," which awards William and Mary a mere C grade.
The price of attending the College has exploded by 49 percent over the past six years - the second highest tuition increase among Virginia public institutions - while the College's tuition and fees as a percentage of median household income have had the highest jump among all Virginia public schools. Along with these cost increases, the College’s administration grew by 61 percent while funds spent on instruction rose by only 42 percent between 2002-03 and 2008-09.
But a testament to the College’s enduring draw and academic focus, freshmen retention and on-time student graduation are among the best in the state.
To help address these issues, ACTA calls for the State Council of Higher Education of Virginia, a higher education public policy body that makes recommendations to the governor and the state legislatures, to take a more assertive stance, seeking closure of superfluous academic programs and encouraging those that produce greater effectiveness. Greater adoption of outside measures of student growth in core skills, is another option where school governance structures can play a key role, ACTA says.
The Liberal Arts at The College of William and Mary:
A Common Curriculum For 21st Century LeadersThe mission of the College is to prepare young men and women to assume positions of leadership at the highest levels of our society..
The undergraduate curriculum at the College must be designed to ensure the accomplishment of that mission
The Society for the CollegeJanuary 29, 2012
www.societyforthecollege.org Executive SummaryThe College has recently gone through an exercise in asking itself what it means to be a liberal arts institution in today’s world and is now evaluating its curriculum to incorporate that discussion. The Society for the College offers here a proposal for fundamental reform of the curriculum intended to preserve and advance the idea of a liberal arts education. Our proposal further provides the College an opportunity to distinguish itself from other institutions by offering a curriculum designed to ensure that students graduate with the kind of comprehensive understanding of the world necessary for them to assume leadership roles in society at large.
We begin with a traditional definition of the liberal arts: that form of education that is worthy of a free person. Translated into terms applicable in today’s society, we conclude that a liberal arts education should provide a solid grounding in the skills and knowledge necessary to assume a practical and effective leadership role in public and private life. Students at William & Mary expect to become leaders, persons of consequence, and the College’s mission is to prepare them for that role.
... Read More ...
|
