A recent Academic Senate vote erased with overwhelming authority
any doubt about whether or not UCLA faculty wants to switch from
semesters to quarters.
“Do you believe that those units of the campus currently
on the quarter system should switch to the semester system?”
the poll question read.
The vote, which took place May 5 through 16, showed 744 faculty
in favor of staying with the current calendar compared to 189
wanting to switch to a semester system. About a third of the 3,276
senate members eligible to vote participated.
The only step left in the calendar debate process is for the
Senate Executive Board to make its final recommendations to
Chancellor Albert Carnesale, due by the end of spring quarter.
At that point, Carnesale will forward his decision, in agreement
or not with the senate, to the University of California Office of
the President.
Voting was conducted online for the first time in senate
history, and Senate Vice Chairman Clifford Brunk said this change
facilitated a “remarkably good” turnout.
Taking into account those members of the senate unlikely to
vote, such as emeriti faculty, Brunk estimated more than 50 percent
of faculty actively involved with the university submitted their
decisions.
Terence Parsons, a philosophy professor, said a change to
semesters would involve “stumbling around with newly formed
courses” and require time, energy and investment of
labor.
“As near as I could see, there was no evidence at all of
any advantage of switching to semesters,” Parsons said,
adding the efforts required for a switch would be in vain without
noticeable benefits for student learning.
While they were in the minority, some professors remained
convinced that a transition to semesters would be better for
UCLA.
Spanish Professor Guillermo Hernández echoed the sentiment
of his department and cast his vote for semesters. In the past
month’s departmental reports, the Spanish department was one
of five that encouraged a switch.
Hernández, who said the result of the vote was
“sad,” said he has been a student under both systems
and that the shorter terms in the quarter system make it difficult
to write long-term papers.
“It goes too fast. I think writing requires drafts, and
semesters would facilitate that,” Hernández said.
He also said one of the semester systems he worked in had a dead
week between the last week of classes and final exams to allow
students to prepare for tests and finish papers, a week he said was
extremely beneficial.
Both professors said having the vote online made the process
very convenient, and that they would prefer voting that way in the
future.
Despite the months of debates, town hall meetings, departmental
reports and faculty voting, the chancellor emphasized in his
original request for an investigation that the final decision rests
with him.
“While establishment of the calendar will ultimately be an
administrative decision, it has profound consequences for our
academic programs. Accordingly, it is essential that I have the
advice of the Academic Senate,” the letter read.
History Professor Patrick Geary said UCLA, as part of the UC
system, has traditionally had a higher level of self-governance
than many more authoritarian universities, and he believes the
chancellor will deeply consider the faculty’s unified
response.
Geary said he suspects Carnesale will respect this tradition of
the university and will choose not to convert “without
overwhelming reason to oppose the tremendous preference on the part
of the faculty.”
For more information on the calendar debate, visit the Academic
Senate Web site at www.senate.ucla.edu.