This past spring, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee placed a resolution to a general vote of the faculty to implement the Plus/Minus Proposal. This resolution would provide faculty with the opportunity to assign pluses and minuses to the final course grades as reported to the registrar and recorded on the official student transcripts. As shown below, this change would be phased in over a period of three years. The results of the faculty vote were strongly supportive of the proposal, with nearly three-fourths supporting the implementation and almost half of the faculty voting.
This proposal has been a controversial issue on campus since its initial introduction more than two years ago. There has been much open discussion and debate among and between both the faculty and the students, and it is precisely this open discussion and debate that has assured me that implementing the proposal as passed is in the best interest of Rensselaer, and I have taken steps to do so.
From the very start, both President Jackson and I have strongly encouraged open debate of this issue. The steps taken by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee included, but were not limited to:
• Presenting to the Student Senate the initial draft of the proposal before it was presented to the Faculty Senate
• Inviting the Grand Marshal and other members of the Student Senate to the Faculty Senate meeting to participate in an open discussion of the grade modifier issue
• Inviting the Grand Marshal and other members of the Student Senate to a special panel discussion, held as part of the spring general faculty meeting
• Inviting representatives of both the Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee and the administration to participate in the student-sponsored forum
• Requesting that faculty discuss the proposed policy with students in their individual classes during GM Week
• Strongly encouraging the students to discuss this issue with the faculty, and the faculty to discuss with the students, through the “Take a Student to Lunch Program”
As a result of the interaction between the faculty and the students, the final proposal has been greatly improved. Specific modifications on the timing of the implementation of the policy were made as a result of suggestions received from individual students and/or the Student Senate. In addition, the policy will be reviewed on an annual basis each year for the first three years of implementation, in order to ensure that any adverse effects or unintended consequences can be mitigated; the body charged with this review will include student representation.
In closing, I want to commend both the faculty and the students and their respective representative bodies, for the thoughtful and collegial manner in which they have approached this issue. One of the foundations of the university is the opportunity to openly and freely discuss and debate issues, and it is this spirit of open discussion and debate that makes our system of higher education superior to any in the world. While some may disagree with the final decision, the manner in which this issue has been presented and discussed is a credit to the faculty, the students, their respective leaders, and to Rensselaer.
