CUE Report: Contents, Acknowledgments, Summary
CUE REPORT: CONTENTS, ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, SUMMARY
===============================================
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
ON UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION 1994
James J. Sheehan, Chair
David W. Brady Charlotte D. Jacobs
John C. Bravman Nelee Langmuir
Donald J. Brown David G. Lowell
Albert M. Camarillo Gail A. Mahood
Wanda M. Corn Brad G. Osgood
Geoffrey M. Cox M. Kenneth Oshman
Lorraine S. Fox John Russell Rickford
H. Craig Heller Guadalupe M. Valdes
Luz Elena Herrera Robert Weisberg
Stanford University
*************************************
COMMISSION ON UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION
*************************************
------------
FINAL REPORT
------------
Acknowledgments
Summary
1. Introduction: The Aims of Undergraduate Education
2. Undergraduate Education at Stanford: An Overview
3. Writing and Critical Thinking
4. The Language Requirement
5. Breadth Requirements:
The Science and Humanities and Social Sciences Cores
6. Breadth Requirements: The Cultures Core
7. The Major
8. Academic Bookkeeping: Credit, Units, Grades, the Transcript
9. The Academic Calendar
10. Technology and Techniques in Teaching and Learning
11. The Academic Environment: Advising
12. The Academic Environment: Residential Education
13. Faculty Responsibility, Assessment, and Governance
14. Conclusion: Undergraduate Education at a Research University
Appendix 1: Membership and Charge
Appendix 2: Subcommittees
Appendix 3: Data
---------------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
---------------
This report has many authors. Most directly, it is the collective
product of the nineteen members of the Commission on Undergraduate
Education. But among the report's authors should also be included those
faculty members, students, alumni, and staff who served on the
Commission's subcommittees, attended our open meetings, participated in
our surveys and focus groups, shared with us their experiences and
suggestions, and offered advice and assistance in numerous other ways.
We have acknowledged some of these collaborators in Appendix 2; many
others will certainly recognize their ideas-and perhaps even their
words-on the following pages. The willingness of so many to contribute
to our deliberations is further evidence of the loyalty and devotion
Stanford evokes from those whose lives it touches. This widespread
commitment to the university's educational mission made our work
possible and worthwhile.
A few particular debts must be acknowledged at the outset. President
Gerhard Casper and Provost Condoleezza Rice initiated our efforts,
offered encouragement along the way, but left us free to do our job as
we thought best. We are grateful to a number of individuals who gave us
the benefit of their experience, shared the results of their research,
and commented on a draft of this report: David Abernethy, Mary Edmonds,
James Gibbons, Herant Katchadourian, David Kennedy, Donald Kennedy,
Richard Light, Paddy McGowan, Michele Marincovich, Franklin Orr, Ann
Porteus, Roger Printup, Paul Seaver, John Shoven, Lee Shulman, Robert
Simoni, Andree Sursock, and Ellen Woods. Jenna Bednar, Todd Benson, Roz
Pierson, and Dan Rodas helped to generate the data upon which our
recommendations rest. The Commission's staff, Lowell Price and Mary Jane
Reese, have a special claim on our gratitude and admiration. It is the
simple truth to say that, without them, our work could not have been
done; because of them, it was a pleasure.
Finally, we want to thank the Irvine Foundation and its president,
Dennis Collins, for a generous grant in support of the Commission's
efforts. We hope that we have adequately justified their confidence in
the importance of our enterprise.
Stanford, California
September 1994
-------
SUMMARY
-------
In October 1993, President Gerhard Casper appointed a Commission on
Undergraduate Education, composed of fourteen faculty members, two
students, two alumni, and the Vice-Provost for Institutional Planning.
For the next nine months, the Commission consulted widely with alumni,
students, faculty, and staff about the university's degree requirements,
major programs, advising system, residential education, academic
calendar, and use of technology in teaching and learning. The
Commission's report is the first comprehensive study of undergraduate
education at Stanford since 1968.
The recommendations in this report fall into two large categories.
First, the Commission has developed a number of specific proposals to
increase the rigor, coherence, and clarity of the undergraduate program:
* creation of a new core requirement to teach science,
mathematics, and technology to nonscientists
* redefinition of the social science and humanities breadth
requirement to enable students to focus on coherent sets of
courses of their own choosing
* clarifying the purpose and increasing the cohesion of the
Cultures, Ideas, and Values requirement by developing courses
that focus on the historical evolution and comparative analysis
of cultural traditions
* extension of the writing requirement to include at least one
writing-intensive course in each student's major
* development of courses in oral communication
* strengthening the foreign language requirement to one year of
college instruction or the passing of a proficiency examination
* steps to enhance the role of foreign languages in the
undergraduate curriculum, including the creation of a language
center
* definition of criteria for an effective major program and
establishment of university-wide reviews for all departments
* introduction of an optional minor to encourage students to use
their electives more effectively
* limitation on the number of courses in which a student may use
the Credit-No credit option and clarification of the meaning of
academic credit and credit units
Second, the Commission proposes a number of processes that would lead to
long-term improvements in undergraduate education:
* establishment of a task force to encourage the effective use of
technology in teaching and learning
* establishment of a group to study the grading system and ways it
might be improved
* examination of ways the academic calendar might be used more
flexibly, both by the university and by individual students
* clarification of the role of general advisors, more effective
use of the Undergraduate Advising Center, and expansion of
opportunities for first- and second-year students to work
closely with faculty members
* improvements in the evaluation of teaching in all its forms,
including more effective means of measuring student opinion and
the introduction of peer evaluations
* introduction of ways to assess all aspects of Stanford's
educational program, including the effectiveness of writing and
language instruction, and the regular review of university
requirements and of major programs
* more rigorous evaluation of teaching and advising and more
prominent recognition of these activities in faculty
appointments, promotions, and compensation
* appointment of a vice provost for undergraduate education to
represent the needs and interests of undergraduates at the
center of university governance
The commission's investigations revealed many sources of pride and
satisfaction in Stanford's undergraduate programs. Stanford students are
among the most talented and energetic in the world; many of them take
full advantage of the extraordinary opportunities the university offers
them. An impressive number of Stanford faculty and staff are devoted to
the university's educational mission and go out of their way to instruct
and inspire undergraduates. There are, nevertheless, many areas in which
undergraduate education can be strengthened. The Commission emphasizes
the continuing need to assess and improve our teaching programs because
it is convinced that Stanford can settle for no less than excellence in
both teaching and research.