Leveling the Field
By Suril Kantaria, Contributing Columnist
Published on Friday, March 5, 2010
As freshmen, we can respect tradition and absorb taunts deeming us the “worst class ever,” but we should not have to accept what we believe are the worst classes ever — courses that don’t truly interest us — just because we cannot receive spots in our first choices. The trend is clear: many students, particularly freshmen, often do not receive their first-choice class selections. It seems that the College has done little to address this problem, meaning that first-years, the tadpoles of Occom Pond, suffer.
To make things worse, with the administration currently considering increasing enrollment to address the budget gap, first-years will have even more difficulty attaining their first choice classes if the administration ignores the problem. Take the economics department as an example. Economics 21 is almost always filled to capacity and therefore many students must settle for the waiting list. According to a member of the economics department whom I spoke with, no members of the class of 2013 received spots in Economics 21 for the Spring. The waiting list has already reached 40 students, and most students likely didn’t even bother to submit their names. Ultimately, they will have to settle for another class. This trend is not specific to the economics and government departments — a fellow classmate and potential English major didn’t receive a place in an English class he requested for Spring term.
The current class enrollment system, which gives preference to seniors and majors, is inherently flawed. Students are attracted to this school because of its strong academic program. We all pay the same tuition to access courses. So when students come here and find out that they can’t take that upper level economics class until they officially become an economics major, they feel cheated. After requiring students to pay a premium for a college education, the registrar should not put road blocks before younger students’ class placements. The idea of giving preference to certain students over others when deciding class enrollment is truly unfair to younger students who may be as talented and as interested as any major in the given subject.
The leading argument in support of the current system is that it is necessary to ensure that majors can complete all of their requirements before graduation. This argument has merit. However, a system in which upper-class students can access their major courses and all students can secure spots in their first choice classes does exist. In this ideal system, the College would periodically assess demand for classes in various departments and hire professors accordingly so the number of class sections truly reflects student demand. The problem, as ironic as it appears, is the supply of classes such as Economics 21 simply fails to meet the demand. Looking at class selection data from past years will likely prove what we already know: the College needs to expand class offerings in the most popular departments, particularly economics and government. Whether by increasing faculty loads or the number of faculty in those particular departments, something needs to change. The data may also suggest that demand for classes in certain departments has decreased. Taken together, this may serve as a reason to consider layoffs in those departments. Although layoffs are never a popular idea, having more professors than necessary in some areas and fewer in others will not help the College achieve fiscal stability or help students receive the best education.
In light of the infeasibility of increasing faculty and laying off non-tenured professors in the short run, the College must turn to a more creative solution while it attempts to restructure departments over time. For example, the economics department can learn from the mathematics department’s structure — caps can be removed from lower level classes and professors can hire grading assistants who also hold office hours. For the time being, students will certainly favor taking their first-choice classes, even if they are large lecture classes, over taking random classes that fail to spark their interest.
For many years, Dartmouth has prided itself on offering the best undergraduate education in the country. In order for students to truly benefit from Dartmouth’s superior education, their class selection must be respected regardless of their place on the registrar’s pecking order. The College must address the shortages and surpluses of classes to bring the market into equilibrium. After all, to paraphrase James Carville, it’s economics, stupid!
I will not waste time debating the ignorance and illogical reasoning of this editorial, as it was clearly published solely to irritate upperclassmen. I only have this to say to the author: You have THREE MORE YEARS to get into that econ 21 class, while others have less time than you. You are not a declared econ major and therefore do not need that class as of yet, whereas others are and do. You clearly did no research about how hiring and firing work in academia, otherwise you would know that you cannot “lay-off” tenured faculty. You also did no research about dartmouth graduate school programs and why certain class can have TAs and others cannot (there is no econ PhD program here, and so there cannot be any Econ grad school students). One appeal of Dartmouth is that all classes (except for some lower level math courses) are taught by professors. Not all students like large lecture courses; one of the reasons many of us chose a small liberal arts college is because we wanted small class sizes. Undoubtedly, many people will say this over the next few days, but allow me to be the first: Grow up.
By dartmouth senior on Mar 5 | 2:56 am
I know – because it once existed – that it’s possible to have a faculty structure at Dartmouth that accommodates student needs without rationing courses by limiting enrollment. I went to Dartmouth from 1968 to 1972. I planned out my courses for years in advance, and only had to worry about the proper order required by prerequisites and the fact that some courses weren’t offered every year. I never had to make contingency plans in case I wasn’t accepted into a particular course due to oversubscription. Such contingencies simply did not happen.
After I left the Dartmouth the undergraduate population went from 3,000 to 4,000 (I was in the last all-male graduating class), and the College went to year-round operation. In theory, the latter change was supposed to accommodate the former, by utilizing the same infrastructure 33% more, to meet the needs of a student population that had grown by 33%. However, we all know in hindsight that there were growing pains, both cultural and structural.
My contact with Dartmouth has been casual and intermittent since graduation, but I surmise the College has finally constructed a physical plant adequate to the current student population. It’s clear that it has not yet adequately addressed the problem of providing a faculty and a course structure that meets the needs of the increased student population. It’s not clear to me why. Classes a third larger than the ones I was in would still be small classes. On the other hand, the theory that using the same infrastructure 33% more would meet the needs of a population 33% larger also seemed plausible, and we now know that that was an oversimplification.
I would suggest, however, given this history, that the worst thing to do in this situation would be to increase enrollment.
By Thomas H. Preacher 72 on Mar 6 | 11:35 am
Dartmouth senior—your points are clearly flawed since you definitely misread the article. So shame on you. The author never says tenured faculty can be laid off—he clearly says non-tenured faculty may be laid off (if the College decides to keep their solution budget-neutral). Also you undermine yourself because clearly YOU didn’t do any research. the math department TAs do NOT teach the classes. They help in grading and proctoring exams. Furthermore, who says the TAs must be grad students? Clearly the author doesn’t. You make an assumption that is not valid—TAs can be standout seniors, thus bringing more jobs to campus. Furthermore, the author agrees with you that a major must take that econ 21 class to graduate—read his graph on how this is “necessary.” It still is unfair and his argument still stands. Things in life can me necessary and unfair at the same time. The author shows that there can be a new system which still accommodates majors who need to finish their requirements. Before you go on attacking a freshman, learn how to read closely. It is a shame that you made such flawed assumptions and arguments. I’d expect more out of a Dartmouth senior. The problem clearly needs to be addressed—my friends at other schools can get into their classes. Dartmouth students should be able to too. I’m paying the same amount in tuition as you, and I should be able to take the classes I want.
By dartmouth freshman on Mar 6 | 11:51 pm
Dartmouth freshmen, I assure you that graduate students are teaching courses in the math department.
By David J. Hemmer 96 on Mar 7 | 10:44 pm
Dartmouth Freshman: There ARE grad students teaching lower-level math courses. You obviously did no research in your rush to defend the author. As for your point about TAs, if the econ department wants to maintain its quality and use TAs solely for the purpose of grading and such, this won’t fix the congestion in any way. Even the most ‘standout’ senior is no match for a TA with graduate-level experience in Econ, which, as Dartmouth Senior, does NOT exist here as we don’t have a grad program in Econ. So that’s an irrelevant point.
The phrase ‘non-tenured professors’ was probably edited in, as I don’t remember reading it the first time I read this article. Regardless, you can’t go laying off non-tenured professors that aren’t in the Econ and Gov departments in order to try and fund more professors in those departments – there are other overcongested areas, and they’ve got a purpose here as well.
Your statement that you ‘should be able to take the classes [you] want’ is childish. The principle of economics is scarcity; currently the College is constrained by budget struggles, and the reality is that we cannot get into all of the classes that we want. The solutions presented (layoffs, increasing sections, using TAs) do not take into account the fact that we can’t increase spending currently enough to have a measured effect and that we need to maintain the quality of our classes that is the hallmark of a liberal arts education.
Though it sucks that we can’t always get the classes we want, the stark reality is that we currently don’t need them as much. When we’re seniors and we’re rushing to fit in major requirements – if the system is still the same – we’ll be glad we have enrollment priority. Your friends at other schools are sitting in huge lecture halls. (Or they’re not going through budget cutbacks as we speak). In exchange for waiting, we get small size and great professor-student interaction.
The author has not put forth a plausible solution given our current constraints. The author has written a complaint, not a well-thought-out suggestion on how the problem can be fixed.
By Another D Freshman on Mar 8 | 8:06 am