Reporter Volume 25, No.15 February 3, 1994

By MARK WALLACE
Reporter Staff

In keeping with a nationwide concern for accountability in higher
education, the University at Buffalo and other SUNY campuses are being
encouraged by SUNY Provost Joseph Burke to develop a variety of
self-assessment programs, Michael Metzger, chair of the Faculty Senate
committee on educational programs and policies, told the Faculty
Senate Executive Committee last week.
	Burke is encouraging assessment in the areas of student
development, teaching quality in general education courses,
effectiveness of undergraduate major programs, and proficiency
standards for skills vital to higher education, Metzger reported.

	Metzger reported that, in response to these concerns, Nicolas
Goodman, interim vice provost for undergraduate education, plans to
determine criteria for mathematics, writing, and foreign language
skills that are developed in functional terms and measured by how well
students perform on nationally normed tests, rather than requiring a
specific course sequence.
	The foreign language skills requirement approved by the
Faculty Senate for next fall will operate in such a manner, Metzger
reported, although functional norms must still be developed by
individual language programs. But writing and mathematics skills are
currently defined in terms of course requirements, he said.
	"We are trying to determine, for a given body of knowledge,
what shall count as a certain degree of efficiency," Metzger said.
"Establishing such standards is a vexed question. The issue is
open-ended, and the EPPC plans to work closely with Goodman on this."
	Nicolas Goodman said that the issue "has to do with
assessment. A lot of what is done with assessment right now I'm not
enthusiastic about.
	"Provost Burke wants assessment in four areas," Goodman said.
"At least in terms of the area of proficiency standards for skills,
there should be a way of saying what we want students to know, and for
determining whether they know it."
	In terms of the new foreign language skills requirement,
Goodman said that what counts as linguistic competence "should be
clear." In terms of mathematics requirements, Goodman said that it
should not be too difficult to agree on what counts as skills. But in
the area of writing there are serious problems, he said.
	"There are conceptual difficulties with how we measure
writing," he said. "Is writing a skill, or not? If it is a skill,
can't we measure proficiency in it? If it's not a skill, why do we
require it?"
	As an example of the difficulties that measuring writing could
cause, Goodman pointed to the results of an attempt to determine the
effectiveness of the University Learning Center. The study showed that
in terms of mathematics, the ULC clearly helped students, Goodman
said, but in writing, the widely varying requirements of English 101
courses made measuring the ULC's effectiveness much more difficult.
"But if writing is considered a skill, should there be this variance
in such courses?" Goodman said.
	Maureen Jameson of Modern Languages and Literatures asked what
flexibility the Undergraduate College would have for defining
"intermediate proficiency" in a foreign language, since it takes
longer to achieve proficiency in some languages. Could defining
"intermediate proficiency" in terms of university requirements vary
for some languages, she asked, and would that not turn the language
requirement back into a course requirement.
	Carol Zemel of Art History said, "I've had to deal with
students who have passed English 101 but can't put sentences
together." She said that UB had the "serious problem" of how to advise
students who need more help with writing because they do not write
well but have passed UB's required writing courses.
	Goodman said that the writing problem was connected with other
"problems of proficiency in the humanities." He wanted to know whether
the EPPC should look into the writing requirement at UB, or whether
another committee should.
	Vic Doyno of English said that the "problem of writing" is
that it consists of "so many different skills," including not just
grammar and spelling but also logic, argumentation, and many other
aspects. And Michael Metzger pointed out that questions of cultural
difference are also a relevant part of the problem.
	Metzger reported also that the EPPC urged the FSEC to accept
Goodman's proposal that Knowledge Area General Education courses,
which in the past could be taught only by full-time faculty, could in
future be taught by part-time faculty and teaching assistants. Metzger
pointed out that the system of Knowledge Area General Education
courses applies only to undergraduate students in professional
programs such as Management and Engineering which have not opted to
take part in the Undergraduate College's general education curriculum
in the Arts and Sciences.
	Nicolas Goodman said that this change was "essentially a done
deal," adding that he hadn't been under the impression that the
Faculty Senate would be involved. He said he wanted to know how such
changes should be handled in future, and whether the FSEC needed to be
informed of them.
	William Miller of Dental Medicine wondered if having part-time
faculty and TA's teaching such courses raised questions about "the
quality of instruction" at UB. And Vic Doyno asked Goodman what he
knew about how graduate student teachers are trained and supervised.
	Goodman responded that he did not know that much about it, but
that he "assumed" that such training may be "inadequate in many
departments." But he said that handling graduate students should
continue to be a duty of the various departments, and that he wanted
them to do a better job with their responsibilities. "I don't think,
in the long run, it's good for UB to try to handle these things
centrally," he said.