Larger class size discussed in University Senate

By Lena Zhu | Published by March 16, 2018

Course capacity — the number of students  allowed in courses based on educational standards set by faculty– is becoming a major issue at Kean.

Two separate University Senate meetings and an open forum were held in the last month where the faculty discussed the changes in class size.

Some professors reported that various administrators were telling them that their course capacity will be increased in apparent violation of University Senate rules.

More psychology courses are expected to increase from 35 to 50 students. An upper level communication course was initially going to be increased from 25 to 35 students, then settled on 30. This change was done without the approval of the University Senate.

The University Senate is the principal agency for the formulation of Kean University policy, according to the University Senate’s webpage.

The University Senate focuses on matters such as faculty affairs, curriculum, finances, and other matters that are relevant to the Kean University. Then they make recommendations to the president.

“Every one of our course documents that gets approved has a course capacity number on it developed by the individual who is developing and teaching that course. That document goes through the department reviewing committee…and is signed off by the dean. So that we have in place, in the registrar’s office, a document that says EMSE 3123 has a course capacity of 30,” said Dr. Patrick Ippolito, head of the University Senate.

The appropriate number of students in a particular course is determined by the professor teaching that course. The amount of students in the class will attribute itself to how well the students learn. A class size with a possibility for 35 students may not be the best environment in which a student can learn effectively.

“We keep saying to prospective students that one of the things that we are very proud of is our class size,” said Ippolito. “We’re not like some of the other institutions that have three or five hundred students in a lecture who never get to know the faculty member.”

Dr. David Joiner, Vice President of the University Senate and a professor teaching in the STEM field, raised a question of the validity and approval of the document itself.

“My question is did the University Senate ever endorse to approve this document?” Joiner asked.

His question was followed by a few moments of silence, before Ippolito stated that he believes that the University Senate did approve them, but would need to double check.

Prof. Holly Logue, a Professor in the Theater Department, said, “I was on this task force at the time and my understanding is that ‘guideline’ meant recommendation.  Not standard, not must, not should, not mandated. It was a guideline. And I don’t think that the senate voted on this, either.”

With all of the questions flying, Ippolito suggested to go to Provost and find out more information and get all of the facts straight before making a final decision.

A public forum on the discussion of course capacity occured on Feb. 27.

Dr. Christopher Lynch, a communication professor who attended the public forum, said, “The course capacity were increased on my class. Dr. Sargent had a meeting with Dr. Bousquet and the compromise seemed to be that the class size would increase by 5 instead of 10.”

Lynch, a communication professor, stated that he has one of the most difficult classes in the program. His need for a smaller class size is vital to his teaching methods.

“In the past, increasing the course sections meant we were bringing in more students into the program and better quality in the program. Right now, I’m concerned with my own class because I struggle with getting through the required work with 25 students,” Lynch explained.

Joiner asked Lynch if he received a new course transmittal form and new course outline with a changed course capacity from 24 to 30 submitted to the communication department committee.

Lynch said no.

A problem arises with one professor teaching a course filled with more than 20 students.

Some classes with the course size of 20 or over were given additional help from a graduate student posing as an assistant to the professor.

Dr. Paula Avioli, a Psychology professor, recounted, “Several years ago, we were asked to change our course caps to allow 50 students with two sections — which we did. However, we were given a graduate student (an academic specialist) to help support the professor in those two courses.”

According to Avioli, in the future, professors in the Psychology Department will not be able to receive academic help from graduate assistants.

Some members were concerned about the role in which the faculty will play in the process of course curriculum.

“The executive director (ED) is negotiating what is in the course outline officially and what is someone asking them to do. Where does the ED negotiator with some other administrator fit into the curriculum process? What does that mean for [the faculty]?” Dr. Emily Filardo, a professor in the School of Psychology, asked.

“It means that we are being cut out of the process,” Ippolito said. “And we have to reassure them that [the faculty] should be a part of the process.“

Joiner questioned the state of action that the Senate will take moving forward. How will they move forward?

“We are gathering information today. We are going to discuss it in front of the Executive Director meeting and we’re going to have a discussion with the administration to find out what their response is to our thoughts and concerns.” said Ippolito.

For now, changes in the course capacity will have to be approved by the committee or department in which the faculty works.

“I think we are going to see changes and see things happen. We are asking for the respect of the administration to discuss and to have the opportunity to provide some rationale in the discussion.”  Ippolito said. “We have to have a negotiation in some way on how we are going to manage going forward. We have to get the faculty involved.”

---