Calendar Conversion
In its charge to the Ad Hoc Committee on Potential Academic Calendar Conversion (AHCPACC), the Academic Senate asked AHCPACC to “compile reasons for and against converting from a quarter-based calendar to a semester-based calendar ….” The AHCPACC acknowledges that there are substantive reasons for and against converting the university’s academic calendar to semesters, reasons which rest to some extent on controversial or contestable judgments, visions, or interpretations. Nevertheless, the AHCPACC accepts the following facts or assumptions as “common ground” that advocates and opponents of calendar conversion on the committee have become convinced are correct:
Cal Poly Pomona is emerging from a very challenging period in its history. While we have many reasons to be optimistic about the university’s future, the effects of the state budget’s crisis still linger and the future is uncertain. In such a stressful situation, it is natural to want to ride out any turmoil, avoid making difficult choices, and simply hope for the maintenance of the status quo. In a period of sudden — and unwelcome — change, more change feels like the last thing we need! But many organizational experts assert that crises are precisely when organizations should begin planning for a better future.
Our future is best served by converting from our existing quarter-based academic calendar to a semester-based calendar. A semester-based academic calendar is not a panacea — it will not solve or address all of the challenges we face. However, a semester-based calendar can ease the process of transferring to and from Cal Poly Pomona; enrich the educational experience for students and faculty; increase faculty chances of securing summer research and teaching opportunities and to improve student job opportunities; and reduce stress and improve quality of life for students, faculty, and university staff. Given these powerful considerations, and the fact that the financial support necessary to implement semester conversion would come from the CSU Chancellor’s Office rather than from the university’s own operating budget, the case for semester conversion is overwhelming. A semester-based Cal Poly Pomona is a better Cal Poly Pomona.
Consider these advantages of a semester-based calendar:
For students, semester conversion could mean
For faculty, semester conversion could mean:
For students, faculty, and staff, semester conversion could mean:
Of course, no change of this magnitude is painless. Not every student, faculty member, academic program, etc. will benefit equally from conversion, and the effort to convert will require careful planning and significant labor.
For students enrolled at Cal Poly Pomona when calendar conversion would occur (3-5 years from now), the transition period will probably be frustrating at times. But a sizeable chunk of the funds provided by the CSU Chancellor could be devoted to additional advising for students so that they understand with the new semester-based curriculum, know how the units they earned under the quarter system would translate into semester units, and can choose courses so that they can earn their degrees in a timely way.
For faculty, the main challenge of conversion would be the development of a new semester-based curriculum. Here again, a large portion of the funds provided by the Chancellor could be devoted to giving faculty course release to study and revamp their program curricula. Faculty already have a responsibility to critically evaluate the curriculum as part of program review or accreditation. But normally, the faculty are given no additional resources to undertake curricular evaluation or reform; semester conversion would therefore make it easier for faculty to fulfill this vital responsibility.
Finally, semester conversion would place special burdens on university staff and administrators, as they would need to revise documents, policies, procedures, and information systems to reflect a semester-based calendar. But once again, the support for staff and administrators to tackle these burdens would not come from Cal Poly Pomona’s operating funds. Furthermore, the administrative burdens associated with conversion could be eased if Cal Poly Pomona were to adopt the practice followed by many other universities that have converted to semesters, wherein a single person within each academic or administrative unit is appointed to oversee that unit’s conversion efforts. Thus, while conversion could not possibly be pain-free, we have good reason to expect that its challenges can be managed and minimized.
Crises are opportunities for positive change. Semester conversion, particularly according to the parameters set by the AHCPACC working model, is just such an opportunity. Again, we should not operate under the illusion that conversion to a semester-based calendar will solve all the institutional challenges we face. Yet many of the factors that will shape the university’s future, such as the state’s budgetary climate and possible increases in student fees, lie outside the campus’ control. But we control our academic calendar, and in offering to underwrite the financial costs of conversion, the Chancellor’s Office is extending us an opportunity to better meet the needs and interests of the Cal Poly Pomona community. The campus community should embrace this opportunity.
Cal Poly Pomona (CPP) along with other CSUs is experiencing a budget crisis. This is evident from the state budget woes over the past few years. It has led to work force reductions (primarily in lecturer numbers) and hence, fewer classes being offered and fewer students graduating in a timely manner. One might argue that a situation of this kind calls for major changes, especially relating to aligning differences among various campuses, such as semester- and quarter-based academic calendars.
Besides the dire financial situation of the CSUs and the state, the conversion to a semester-based calendar is not beneficial enough to justify the time, effort, and above all, the cost (short-term costs of 5-7 million dollars without software (Bronco Direct, PeopleSoft) costs). Since its establishment, CPP has operated on quarters and thrived as a campus. It provides students access to a breadth of courses, flexibility in scheduling, smaller class sizes and affordable tuition/other fees over the year. No evidence shows conversion to a semester calendar will enhance the educational experience of students and improve the quality of life of faculty, staff, and students.
Changing to a semester-based calendar will call for a major curriculum overhaul for most departments. Completely redesigning courses and revising academic programs to be as efficient and effective as they are currently along with obtaining approvals from various governing (accreditation) bodies will entail endless faculty hours. Some core and many elective courses may be lost and the curriculum will be less diverse. It’s a myth that depth may be gained at the cost of sacrificing specialized/elective courses on a semester calendar. In the quarter system, greater depth can be achieved using a 2-course sequence (20 weeks as opposed to 15 weeks). Further, changing curriculums may lead to increased demands by accreditation committees. This may be caused by loss of either core and/or elective courses or potential increase in class size.
Some disadvantages of converting to a semester-based calendar follow.
For students, semester conversion could mean:
For faculty, semester conversion could mean:
CPP and other CSU campuses on quarter calendars have operated successfully since their inception. There is currently no defensible, widely applicable proof of the educational superiority of one calendar (quarter or semester) over another. A change of this magnitude will not improve anything significantly, even long term. In fact, CPP may experience net and full-time equivalent enrollment declines as other institutions have who converted from quarters to semesters. Further, no evidence shows conversion to semesters will produce financial benefits, in spite of high initial costs. If anything, an argument might be made in favor of the quarter system as CPP will be able to manage annual enrollment targets better. It has 3 chances per year in the quarter system to adjust targets as opposed to 2 in the semester system.
Even if the Chancellor’s office funds the costs of converting to a semester (no written confirmation of this claim as of yet from his office) calendar, there may not be funds to cover all the conversion costs including faculty assigned time for course and other curricular conversion activities. Faculty is already burdened with heavy teaching and related assignment workloads along with research and writing responsibilities and WASC and program accreditations.
Given the commuter nature of the CPP campus and its sizable non-traditional and working student population, a quarter-based campus provides students more opportunities to achieve success and make-up failures. The fast paced nature of the quarter system means students are less likely to fall behind. Further, it is easier for them to focus on a subject for 10 weeks than 15 weeks. It is easier for faculty on the quarter system to increase their teaching load one quarter and then be released a quarter to do research too. The quarter system also provides a means to cover subject material in depth and greater flexibility in arranging material;1- 2- or 3-sequence courses may be offered various times a year in the quarter system.
Even though CPP faces major institutional challenges ahead, converting to a semester calendar is not a solution to any of these challenges. Accreditation of the University and the quality of each individual program determines its strength, not its academic calendar. Many of our sister campuses are on semester calendars as are the many other universities, but their academic calendars are not indicative of the strength of their programs or the quality of their students and faculty. The impetus to improve/realign program curriculums should result from program review, not a change to the academic calendar. The evidence is clear. CPP is well served by the quarter system. Why change? Conversion to a semester calendar is not justified.
