Conversion could serve as catalyst for other changes

A conversion to semesters at Ohio State would not"turn the University upside down," as one student suggested at a recent town meeting on the subject. Instead, administrators say, a transition to semesters could serve as a catalyst around which a number of already-scheduled and ongoing University improvements -- ranging from implementation of a new Student Information System to an intensive examination of the undergraduate curriculum -- could be shaped.

"We believe that moving toward semesters is an activity that would advance all of these other projects," said Martha Garland, vice provost and dean for undergraduate studies. Garland was responding to student concerns expressed at an April 16 town meeting at which some suggested the conversion to semesters, if implemented at Ohio State, would threaten to interfere with efforts to improve the student experience and enhance the University's academic excellence. Among those projects sparking student comments were improvements to undergraduate advising, reductions in closed courses and efforts to promote timely graduation.

A carefully planned multi-year transition, should a conversion be approved, would be designed to minimize disruption to work and study for all involved, officials pledged. And from the Ohio State leadership's point of view, a calendar conversion is highly likely to offer significant institutional advantages over time.

"There are great universities on quarters and there are great universities on semesters. So, a university that aspires to be world class can be world class on quarters or on semesters," Executive Vice President and Provost Edward J. Ray told the students."However, there is a clear trend toward semesters among the very best universities. That is a source of concern for us because there is also a trend toward collaboration among universities with respect to study abroad programs, collaborative research projects among faculty, consortial distance education arrangements and other partnerships among universities.

"Remaining on quarters creates the risk that we will be at an increasing disadvantage over time in participating in those multi-university initiatives."

The town meeting was one element of the Universitywide conversation about a possible conversion that has continued into spring. The Ad Hoc Calendar Review Committee has met with numerous colleges, departments and other constituency groups to gather opinions, hear any concerns and share information (see www.osu.edu/calendarstudy for more information). The committee also hosted representatives from several institutions for an educational day of discussion April 3 about the conversion experience at their schools and, specifically, effects on students and faculty.

That event, plus a continuing examination by the committee, has turned up some universal truths about calendar conversions: Processes are designed so that students will not be hurt academically by the transition, and no peer-reviewed research exists to prove that one calendar or another is better for student learning, said Grady Chism, chair of the ad hoc committee and professor of food science and technology. In addition, committee members and University officials concede that there are nearly as many opinions about the advantages or disadvantages of each calendar as there are people interested in weighing in on the subject.

Chism, committee member and undergraduate student David Lieberman, President Brit Kirwan, Ray and University Registrar Brad Myers sat on the panel for the April 16 student town meeting at the Frank W. Hale Jr. Black Cultural Center. In response to a number of student concerns about issues ranging from a feared semester burn-out factor to tuition payment plans, officials assured the audience that students' needs will be taken care of should the conversion go forward.

They also reiterated that the conversion is not a done deal. Though Kirwan has said he believes Ohio State would be better served on semesters for purposes of pedagogy, collaborations with other institutions, flexibility in course offerings and cost savings over time, he said the University has not committed to moving forward with a conversion and that the decision-making process will play out over several months.

"There is no absolute best way to organize a university calendar," Kirwan said."Both semesters and quarters have their advantages. It's really a matter of deciding which outweighs the other."

Added Ray,"At the request of the president, the Senate leadership appointed a committee to look at, deliberate and assess the issues associated with calendar conversion and to provide a recommendation on whether or not a calendar conversion is right for us. Rather than making a leap of faith, we're trying to have an informed discussion."

Senate vote not likely before fall

The Ad Hoc Calendar Review Committee, appointed at President Brit Kirwan's request by a group of faculty governance leaders, maintains its plans to issue a report by May 15 with a recommendation on whether to convert to semesters. A recent vote by Faculty Council called for a continuation of campus discussion once the recommendation is made.

The council, comprised of the 70 faculty members in University Senate, voted 42 to 9 in early April to delay any vote of the full Senate body on a calendar conversion recommendation until at least December 2001. Originally, the committee's recommendation was expected to move more swiftly to the Senate floor.

The council's resolution stated that"the last two weeks of spring quarter and summer quarter will not provide the time or opportunity for full faculty participation in a debate on calendar conversion, if such be recommended." The council conveyed to the administration that it is"imperative for a debate on calendar conversion to extend at least through autumn quarter 2001."

Because the Senate does not meet in December, a vote presumably would take place in November, said Susan Fisher, secretary of University Senate.

Team proposes concepts for Multicultural Center

An academically based Multicultural Center that offers a variety of programs and services and facilitates cross-cultural interaction is proposed by a committee charged with completing the first design phase of establishing such a center at Ohio State.

The center, identified as an initiative in the Diversity Action Plan and one of the major diversity activities set in motion by the central administration this year, is to be housed in the short term within a cluster of fourth-floor rooms in the Ohio Union. The Multicultural Design Team has proposed the center's mission, vision and value statements and offered a series of conceptual recommendations on details ranging from staffing to programming.

The committee felt strongly that the Multicultural Center at Ohio State must be grounded in the University's academic base and connections, said Patricia Stuhr, a professor of art education who co-convened the committee with Rebecca Parker, assistant vice president for student affairs and director of the Ohio Union.

The committee was appointed jointly by and reports to Edward J. Ray, executive vice president and provost, and William H. Hall, interim vice president for student affairs. The group, representing faculty, staff and students and seeking to represent a broad range of backgrounds, was charged to address a number of questions, including:

• What are appropriate mission and vision statements for a Multicultural Center at Ohio State?

• What curricular, co-curricular and service elements are critical in the start-up phase to ensure the center's long-term success?

Other questions concerned space use and staffing needs, as well as how such centers are configured at other institutions. In addition to numerous meetings, the committee held three public forums to seek campus and community input and share information about the center.

According to the mission statement, the center will exist"to provide intellectual and cultural enrichment, programs and services, and facilities; and to create a community environment that recognizes cultural differences, respects cultural uniqueness, and facilitates cross-cultural interaction, learning and appreciation."

Organizing recommendations under three major design components -- academic initiatives, academic and support services, and outreach and engagement -- the committee has issued a report to the offices of Academic Affairs and Student Affairs and has received approval to move forward with a redesign of the Ohio Union space. In the long term, the committee proposes that a multi-use center be constructed in a more visible location on campus.

Suggested staffing includes a center director and professional staff coordinators for each of the design components. In addition, office staff, student employees and a development officer are recommended. The committee proposes that a center staff member should be hired immediately to initiate and monitor the earliest phases of the center's implementation.

Academic initiatives proposed by the committee revolve around the center's function as a clearinghouse of courses, programs, research, work opportunities and funding sources that are diversity-related. In addition, center staff would be expected to assist in development of courses that are interdisciplinary, encourage team teaching, contain content that crosses socio-cultural boundaries, and offer practical application opportunities. Further, the committee suggests the center could house scholars or artists in residence, make annual grants available for diversity-related research, and host international presentations of such research.

Sample academic and social support services include programs that reflect multiple perspectives, services that target specific populations, and such activities for faculty, staff and students as mentoring, tutoring, internships, resource fairs, and diversity-related orientation and training.

In recommending the center's approach to outreach, the committee acknowledged in its report that"diversity and multiculturalism are not easy topics to discuss. In fact, our society has a tendency to avoid interacting around these issues -- making it even more difficult for us to actively engage one another in productive dialogue. It will be necessary for the center staff to reach out to the community, both on and off campus."

In fact, the committee itself began its deliberations by seeking assistance from a consultant -- Josh Stulberg, professor of law at OSU -- in building trust and facilitating productive communication within the group. A previous committee, convened in the early 1990s to investigate the possibility of a multicultural center and comprised primarily of students, cited an inability to complete its charge, in part because of the group's large size and difficulty with issues of trust.

"We took time up front to slow down enough to work out the process," Parker said."We are talking about issues America doesn't know how to talk about. We looked at all of the issues and constituencies. I think that, because we did that, it was easier at times to put issues on the table."

Added Si'le Singleton, director of Ethnic Student Services,"We really tried hard to represent everyone's voice here. We found we had a lot in common. We took all ideas and worked very hard not to be exclusive."

The committee's membership included persons of African American, American Indian, Asian/Pacific American, Latino/a and European background, as well as representatives from Student Gender and Sexuality Services.

From here, the committee seeks to capitalize on momentum surrounding the project by extending its services into a second design phase and, eventually, a first phase of implementation. Among the recommended steps are appointment of student and community advisory boards, a cataloging of existing programs and services offered by other units on campus that overlap current design recommendations to refine specific center proposals, and continuation of benchmarking studies of other institutions' centers.

More information is available at www.osu.edu/multiculturalcenter.

Multicultural Center Design Committee

Rebecca Lee Parker, Student Affairs

Patricia Stuhr, Art Education

Ivan Adames, Student Activities & Campus Programs; Organization of Hispanic Faculty and Staff; Hispanic Oversight Committee

Patricia Cunningham, USG

Robert Fox, Speech and Hearing Services

Keith Kilty, Social Work; Multicultural Alliance for Diversity (MAD); Hispanic Oversight Committee

Barry Landeros-Thomas, American Indian Student Services; MAD

Si'le Singleton, Ethnic Student Services

Jessica Vallejo, USG

Elizabeth Warren, GLBT Student Services; CGS

Larry Williamson, Frank Hale Black Cultural Center

Judy Wu, History; MAD

Willa Young, Student Gender & Sexuality Services

Multicultural Center Design Oversight Committee

Mary Daniels, Student Affairs

David Horn, Comparative Studies in the Humanities

Alayne Parson, Academic Affairs

Team's Value Statement

We value:

Lifelong Learning

Intercultural Collaboration

The Celebration of Differences

Active Engagement in the Process of Inclusion

The Struggle Against Prejudice and Discrimination

The Exploration, Investigation and Presentation of Cultural Issues and Their Complexities

next page...