Late drop policy may change

Due to concerns expressed by faculty members and the
university’s changing economic climate, the UCLA
College’s late drop policy may be changed to prevent students
from dropping courses after fourth week.

At their May 6 meeting, the Faculty Executive Committee will
vote on policy revisions which will grant a drop after fourth week
only if extraordinary circumstances are documented.

The student’s transcript will note that the late drop was
allowed for non-academic reasons.

While the definition of “extraordinary
circumstances” has not been finalized, it is expected to only
include medical and family emergencies.

Mitchell Morris, a member of the Ad Hoc Workgroup on Course Drop
Policies in the College, presented a draft of the proposed
amendments to the Faculty Executive Committee at their meeting on
April 8.

The workgroup was created in February 2005 at the request of
Robin Garrell, chair of the Faculty Executive Committee, and Judith
Smith, vice provost of undergraduate education, in response to
ongoing concerns expressed by faculty members with students
dropping courses from their study lists.

The current policy allows students to drop any non-impacted
class between fifth week and the last day of instruction by filing
a petition requiring their instructor’s signature. Late drops
are subject to a transcript notation stating the week in which the
course was dropped.

The drop policy for impacted courses will not be changed.

The ad hoc committee is hopeful that policy revisions will
actually prevent professors from having to declare their courses
impacted in the future.

Budget cuts were a consideration in the reworking of the drop
policy.

Proponents of the change consider late drops a waste of
educational resources and a serious problem when there already are
not sufficient courses offered to meet student demand.

But not everyone agrees.

“When you look at the implications of financial aid and
even tying to meet (Expected Cumulative Progress) ““
it’s just going to have a severe effect on students,”
said Eligio Martinez, Academic Affairs commissioner.

Students can drop courses for a variety of reasons, including
health problems, family emergencies, inability to sustain their
academic workload, commitments to extracurricular activities,
athletics or employment and due to academic difficulties.

Data from the registrar’s office indicates that over
15,000 students had at least one late drop over a four-year period
““ that’s well over half of the students enrolled in the
College.

In the interest of meeting the standards of academic excellence,
the ad hoc committee believes the current policy encourages
absenteeism and irresponsibility in students, who know they have
the option of dropping the course at their convenience if they have
not been attending classes regularly, or have missed or received
poor grades on exams and quizzes.

In its attempts to make students more accountable for their
academic progress, the blanket policy may inadvertently affect
students with academic reasons for dropping a course.

If students find themselves unprepared for a course, their
motive for dropping may not be considered valid under the proposed
changes.

Martinez fears that faculty may be letting their egos get in the
way of upholding sound academic policies.

“I kind of question their intentions, because what
I’ve heard is that they consider it disrespectful when
students drop in 10th week,” Martinez said.

Student and faculty input will be seriously considered during a
period of open comment on the proposed changes, Garrell said.

The Faculty Executive Committee last discussed the course drop
provisions during the 2002-2003 academic year, but postponed
revisions until the effects of the expected cumulative progress
requirements, enacted in 2001, could be assessed.

Faculty members also believe late drops can seriously impact
other students’ grades in a class, especially in classes with
curved grading.

But the call for a policy change comes at a time when the
frequency of late drops is actually decreasing, as it has been
doing steadily since 2001.

“There’s a question whether that decline was
substantial, and how much of that decline is directly attributed to
ECP versus the substantial increases in fees,” Smith
said.

While considering changes in 2003, counseling staff advised the
Faculty Executive Committee that there are insufficient resources
to handle the potential influx of petitions requiring review,
particularly as budget cuts continue to deplete their staff.

“It would take counselors away from their job to deal with
petty issues,” Martinez said.

The ad hoc committee believes a return to the fourth week drop
policy, once a policy at UCLA, will maintain standards of academic
excellence and the university’s reputation.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *