Senate wants more core curriculum study

In its first meeting of the year Feb. 12, the Holland Faculty Senate embraced the idea of a fall semester holiday while stiff-arming by a small majority the university's use of a computerized investigative tool used by many police departments.

Senators also expressed an overwhelming desire that more study be given to a proposed new core curriculum.

In the matter of extra vacation days, the advisory body voted 22 to 10, with four abstentions, to support a resolution that had been initiated by the Student Association. The SA has requested a two-day fall break be added to the university's schedule.

In its report to the full senate, the Student Affairs Committee related its discussions of the matter with officials in the Registrar's Office. Based on those discussions, committee members learned that the two days could be added only by starting the semester two days earlier than scheduled. In the next two school years, this would mean starting dates of Aug. 16 and 14, respectively.

Admitting that many of its members either were ambivalent or "strongly opposed" to the idea of adding the extra days, the committee, nevertheless, agreed to support the idea because such a break "is important to the Student Association" and because of its "respect for that body."

As to the use of what is known as a Computer Voice Stress Analyzer, senators voted 19 to 14, with four abstentions, to support a one-sentence substitute recommendation by Sen. Dan Embree that "The Holland Faculty Senate disapproves of the use of the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer."

The matter initially came before the senate as part of its responsibility to review all proposed operating procedures for the university.

Embree successfully pushed his substitute motion after the Student Affairs Committee had announced its two-part recommendation that called for rewordings of Operational Procedures 91.103 (Guidelines for the Application and Use of the Computer Voice Stress Analyzer). In the first part, committee members had proposed that the OP be changed to say that the equipment would only be used "for investigative and other purposes." In the second, it had sought to have an OP subsection changed to read: "CVSA results will not be introduced as evidence in a disciplinary hearing."

In their last-and longest-discussion of the day, senators voted 28 to 3 in support of the Academic Affairs Committee decision not to approve the proposed new Academic Core Curriculum until certain changes are made.

Within a core curriculum, all or some of the subjects or courses are based on a central theme in order to correlate the subjects and the theme.

"The proposed core curriculum and report [should] be forwarded to the university Committee on Courses and Curricula for further consideration, revision and, ultimately, for submission to the general faculty," committee members said.

The University Core Curriculum Committee (UCORE) had submitted the new core curriculum nearly a year ago.

In taking issue, senators agreed with Academic Affairs Committee concerns that, among other things, the proposals might "weaken college and departmental faculty's ability to control their own curricula" and that "core requirements which vary over such a wide range (36-51 hours) raise a question" about how UCORE defines a core."

A complete summary of the February meeting can be read on the Faculty Senate home page, which can be reached via the MSU homepage by hitting the "Academics" icon, then scrolling to "Organizations."