Panel reports on make-up work
Developing one-size-fits-all language is difficult, FSEC told

By SUE WUETCHER
Reporter Editor

Defining a policy requiring faculty members to provide make-up tests or additional instruction for students who miss exams or classes due to other university-supported commitments has proven to be frustrating for a Faculty Senate committee.

Jack Meacham, professor of psychology and chair of the senate's Educational Programs and Policies Committee, related his panel's difficulties to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee at the group's April 14 meeting.

Meacham used the example of the student-athlete to illustrate to FSEC members the issue of students who essentially have "two contracts" with UB: a contract to perform on a team-or some other "university-sanctioned commitment"-and a contract to fulfill all of the requirements of the courses in which the athlete is enrolled. There may be instances, he said, where the athlete is expected to participate in an athletic contest out of town on the same day an exam is scheduled in one of the athlete's classes. In these cases, students are "caught in a bind as to which contract rules."

Although providing make-up work usually does not pose a problem for faculty members teaching small courses, who easily can make alternative arrangements, Meacham acknowledged that for faculty teaching large courses of 100-450 students, the notion of having a policy requiring them to provide make-up exams or additional instruction for students with a variety of commitments or legitimate absences is "frightening."

"There are two 'goods' here that we're trying to balance," he said. "What's called for is balance, reasonableness and fairness on the part of both faculty and students."

Meacham said his committee was having a hard time developing the "actual wording (for a policy) that does what's right for the faculty, that does what's right for the students."

The committee has devoted two meetings to discussion of the issue, and has assigned the task to a subcommittee, he said, adding that the committee will spend one more meeting wresting with the issue.

In response to an observation from Mitchell Harwitz, associate professor of economics, who suggested that the problem was isolated to large classes with "particularly rigid scheduling problems or a particularly rigid faculty instructor," Meacham pointed out that some small classes do require some set-up, such as laboratory facilities, that would be difficult to recreate a few days later.

Moreover, he noted that there are some courses, such as the American Pluralism course that he teaches, in which students learn through interacting with each other in class. While he can relate to the student the theme of the class, "that's not the same as having them struggle for an hour and a half through a number of exercises with their peers and debate the issues and come to insights in their own mind. I can't recreate that experience for the students."

Harwitz suggested that in those cases, the faculty member put a "flag on the syllabus that says there are aspects of this class that can't be rescheduledŠthe student has to make a choice."

But having such a warning on the syllabus "doesn't guarantee that we won't get through all the situations that arise," Meacham replied, noting that students do have family emergencies and at least half of students work and may miss class due to a change in work schedule.

William Baumer, professor of philosophy, told FSEC members that he has made it a policy to give make-up exams. In addition, he said, he gives students a certain number of absences they can use before their grades are affected and suggested that that kind of policy is a reasonable way to spare faculty members from the inevitable "dying grandmother" excuses.

Meacham pointed out that most faculty members have a variety of procedures that they use in these situations, procedures that differ from department to department, discipline to discipline, and also depend upon the personality of the instructor "and to some extent how many times you've been burned recently."

The committee's difficulty has not been with developing examples of procedures that have worked for faculty members, but with developing language that, if presented as a Faculty Senate resolution, would work for all faculty and all departments and all types of classes. "We're stuck at that," Meacham admitted.

Samuel Schack, professor of mathematics, said he didn't think the Faculty Senate should try to "micromanage how instructors conduct their courses." The reason the committee is having trouble developing a regulation, he suggested, is because there should not be a universitywide regulation as to how faculty handle these types of situations.

What might be more appropriate, he said, is for the senate to develop some sort of appeals process that a student might pursue to receive an impartial hearing when a faculty member is not willing to accommodate the student.