Adult Education program in limbo
Spectrum Volume 17 Issue 10 - October 27, 1994
Members of the Commission on Graduate Studies and Policies expressed concern about the future of the Adult and Continuing Education Program during the commission's meeting last Wednesday.
The College of Education's recommendation to privatize the program was not part of the resolution passed by the University Council endorsing the restructuring plan. Len Peters said if the Board of Visitors accepts the plan on November 15, action will begin to terminate the program, unless it has found a home.
Martha Johnson asked if anyone had approached Family and Child Development. She said that the program is more important to the off- campus mission than on- campus. "We should look at separate evaluation for on and off campus."
Joe Merola suggested the issue of off and on- campus evaluation be referred to the committee examining extended campus programs and issues.
John Burton protested, "I thought the provost wanted to save 20 percent. Instead we've transferred exercise physiology to Human Resources, and now this program. I don't see us saving money. We're just pulling productive programs out of the College of Education."
Peters reported that Wayne Worner and Peggy Meszaros are in continuous discussion. Although more than half of the funding went with the exercise program, the College of Education is receiving credit for the cuts, and if the Adult and Continuing Education Program is moved, the resources would not be transferred to another college to take up the program.
Peters and Johnson agreed the issue is not faculty positions, but that the program is one that serves a clientele in Northern Virginia. Peters will talk to Woerner and Pat Hyer before the commission decides on any action.
In other business:
* The issue of admission of non- degree students will be referred to the Extended Campus Committee. Consideration of budget constraints will be part of that discussion.
* Policy Memo No. 126 was also referred to committee. The memo, passed in 1992 but never implemented, calls for each graduate degree program to formulate and keep on file a policy statement spelling out criteria governing faculty participation on graduate-student advisory committees, admissions procedures and requirements, and management of graduate students. The committee is to suggest a means for implementing the memo.
John Eaton said that a couple of graduate-student appeals have been upheld "because departments had not related their expectations up front."
Brian Sayre agreed, "This is a problem in some departments. Students discover at the last minute that there are additional requirements they must meet."
Jennifer Tank said graduate students in biology have two committee meetings a year, while "some departments have one committee meeting just before you are to graduate." She suggested a specific number of committee meetings would be helpful.
* A nomination committee was named to find a vice chair since the vice chair of the commission chairs the Course and Curriculum Review Committee.