College of Letters and Science Faculty Document No. 715 (amended)
October 13, 2005

Recommendation to Amend Faculty Document Number 677 (As Amended) to Remove Sport & Recreation Courses Prohibition

Recommendation:

That the L&S Faculty amend L&&S Fac. Doc. 677 (as amended) by eliminating item f., which reads as follows:

for both the B.A. and B.S. degrees, eliminate the acceptance of sport and recreation credits;

Rationale:

In May, 2004, the L&S Faculty approved a proposal [Fac. Doc. 677 (as amended)] to change the requirements for the L&S degrees.

The proposal contained a number of other changes designed to strengthen the degree, including changing the foreign language requirement for the B.A., replacing the capstone requirement with a research requirement, and allowing students to declare their majors much earlier (after 15 credits rather than after 45 credits have been earned). In addition, the Faculty voted to repeal the provision that allows L&S students to count 6 credits of Sport and Recreation courses toward the minimum 120 credits required for a degree on the grounds that these courses, while valuable, do not meet L&S academic standards.

The L&S proposal was forwarded to the APCC (Academic Policy and Curriculum Committee) in Spring 2005. The APCC voted to recommend to Provost Rita Cheng approval of all the changes proposed by L&S with the exception of the change regarding Sport and Recreation courses. Upon receipt of the APCC's recommendation, the Provost requested that the College Faculty reconsider the Sport and Recreation provision of the proposal.

In response to what it considered undue interference in L&S governance, the L&S Academic Program and Curriculum Committee has voted to recommend to the Faculty that the Faculty reaffirm its support of the proposal concerning the L&S degree requirements as it was submitted originally. The problem with this approach is that approval of the AP&CC recommendation by the Faculty is likely to result in an extensive process of appeals through the University Committee and the Campus Faculty Senate, delaying for at least another year the changes in the language, capstone, and other requirements. The entire package is being held hostage until the Sport and Recreation issue is resolved. I argue that by insisting that the L&S proposal be approved in its original form, we are only cooperating with the hostage-takers, sacrificing the total package for the part, on the grounds of "principle."

If the Sport and Recreation prohibition is removed from the recommended changes to the L&S degree requirements, it is very likely that the proposal will be approved by the Provost immediately, allowing the Faculty to implement the remainder of the revisions to the degree requirements in Fall 2006.

A separate proposal to prohibit the Sport and Recreation courses can be pursued later. The rationale could include data on how many L&S students actually use S&R credits to reach the 120 minimum number of credits required as well as information on how many electives other schools and colleges allow (for example, Engineering allows only 3 credits of electives). This would result in a more compelling proposal for APCC to consider.