Background

In 2005, the L&S Faculty approved revisions to the L&S degree requirements that included a statement indicating that no Sport and Recreation courses could be counted toward the L&S degree. When objections were raised by the School of Health Professions, the Provost asked the College Faculty to reconsider this provision. The Academic Program and Curriculum Committee voted to recommend to the Provost approval of the degree requirements without the exclusion of Sport and Recreation courses. The L&S Faculty was faced with a choice between delaying desirable changes in the degree requirements in order to carry on the fight to exclude Sport and Recreation credits or agreeing to eliminate that exclusion in order to implement the other changes.

On October 13, 2005, the Faculty considered a recommendation from the L&S curriculum committee that it reaffirm its original decision to disallow Sport and Recreation credits. A substitute motion was made, one that would allow approval of the degree requirements without the exclusion of Sport and Recreation courses. During the discussion of the substitute motion, the Faculty decided to ask the L&S curriculum committee to write a proposal to amend the degree requirements by excluding Sport and Recreation courses that would go forward as a separate item later. The degree requirements were approved without the exclusion statement, and the Faculty expressed the wish that the curriculum committee develop a separate proposal to exclude Sport and Recreation courses that would provide a well-thought-out rationale, supported by data on the impact of Sport and Recreation courses in the L&S degree.

The 2006-2007 curriculum committee discussed the Faculty's request to develop such a proposal and voted to recommend the following to the L&S Faculty:

Recommendation

That the L&S Faculty desist in its attempts to exclude Sport and Recreation courses from credits that count toward the L&S degree.

Rationale

Associate Dean Tom O'Bryan has reported that a review of transcripts of graduating L&S students has revealed that few students would be affected by the proposal to exclude Sport and Recreation courses. He indicated that many students graduate with more than 120 credits, so the inclusion of a few credits of Sport and Recreation does not impact the number of credits students earn in courses that the Faculty feels have more substantial academic content. The Provost already has declined to approve this exclusion once; it is likely she would refuse again. The ill will toward L&S that this proposal generates in other schools and colleges argues strongly against pursuing this request, which has such little impact and which is likely to fail in any case.