University of Virginia Library

G&FA Communicates Issues

By Donn Kessler
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

For the first time in the history of the
Department of Government and Foreign
Affairs, the department faculty Tuesday
night met with government students to
discuss general problems and procedures
of the department.

The meeting generally revolved around
a list of recommendations for the
improvement of the department distributed
by former student representatives
on the Graduate Committee on Curriculum
and the current student representatives
to the faculty.

A large portion of the meeting was
involved in discussing the complaints of
many students about a lack of communication
between them and the faculty.

Suggestions Made

In line with this fact, the list of
suggestions asked for a semester newsletter
to inform students and faculty of
the names of incoming faculty members, recent
publications, names and numbers of faculty
committees, and guest lecturers.

Suggestions were also made for a centrally
located room for casual faculty and student
discussions, and reform of the advising system
in the department where advisors would be
matched with students according to interests
and where graduate and undergraduate students
might be assigned as assistants to help the
advisors.

In the discussion on communication, suggestions
were made by students that a more formal
way be developed to sample student opinions
on matters of promotion, courses, and departmental
reform. Suggestions for the official use
of the student Government and Foreign Affairs
Association, appointment of students on
committees and the formation of student
sub-committees to represent student opinion
were made.

Committee Problems

In the discussion of the department
administration, faculty members answered
questions concerning committee structures,
voting privileges, and the advising system.

David Jordan, chairman of the department,
stated that lists of committees were public
knowledge and that difficulties with committees
occurred generally on two points.

The first of these problems was that faculty
members could not be compelled to sit on
committees and since remuneration for extracurricular
activities was, as one faculty member
stated, "rare."

The second problem in committees came
from what Mr. Jordan stated in having
"different men with different views on the
faculty" working for a consensus.

Mr. Jordan also explained that faculty
members only had one vote each in any
meeting and that the only time voting was
restricted to certain faculty members was on
questions of promotion.

In the area of promotion, Mr. Jordan
explained that the department followed the
American Association of University Professors'
guidelines on considerations for promotion
after five years of service.

He further explained that three aspects were
considered for promotion, namely a review of
scholarship, teaching, and the priorities of the
department.

Student Opinion

At this point in the meeting, students
mentioned that the process for sampling
student opinion on promotions appeared to be
nebulous and asked faculty members to explain
if and how student opinion was sampled.

Alfred Fernbach, a professor of the
department stated that he had been asking
students to evaluate his courses but had found
that opinions were so variant that this process
had proved unrealistic.

Other faculty members indicated to the
students that they were usually able to sample
student opinion through general discussion and
through the course evaluation booklet.

In discussion on the content of the
department courses, students criticized the
structure of the introductory courses and the
load of teaching assistants in them.

Suggestions were made to divide the large
introductory courses into smaller lecture groups
with graduate students teaching them.