University of Virginia Library

I would like to correct the
inaccurate report emanating
from the State Council of
Higher Education and
publicized in the March 3 issue
of the Richmond News Leader
and the March 6 issue of The
Cavalier Daily which states that
the Social Foundations of
Education program at the
University of Virginia is
"unproductive."

I will not bother with an
analysis of the productivity
yardstick which equates
quantity with quality, which
does not question
"over-productivity" which
encourages mass production
and thoughtless expansion,
which ignores the role
programs such as ours play in
terms of service to
undergraduate and graduate
non-majors and which is
oblivious to the unique role
graduates in this area assume in
Schools of Education.

But in defense of the seven
graduate students who have
already received degrees in this
field since its inception in 1969
and out of concern for the
twelve others now in various
stages of their programs, a
factual reply to factual
inaccuracies must be presented.

First of all, the assertion
that this program has produced
no graduates in the last three
years is flatly false. The Social
Foundations of Education area
initiated graduate degree
programs at the Masters and
doctoral level in the spring of
1969.

In August of 1970 we
awarded our first M.Ed. degree;
three were awarded in June of
1971, another in August of
1971 and two more in January,
1972. Presently, seven more
students expect to receive
M.Ed. or M.A. degrees in the
field by June or August of this
year. Unproductive?

We do plead guilty to not
having "produced" any
doctoral students as yet.
Rightly or wrongly, we have
stressed the merits of a small,
doctoral program, not only in
light of a demanding job
market but also out of a
commitment to the principle
of close student-faculty
contact and, hopefully,
superior educational
experiences.

To have graduated even one
doctoral student from a
program operative less than
three years would seem to me
more highly questionable than
the sin we are accused of
committing. Be that as it may,
let it be noted that five
doctoral students are currently
enrolled, with two others
accepted thus far for entry into
the program in September.

Of the five now enrolled,
two have completed
comprehensive examinations
and are engaged in dissertation
research; two others will take
their comps this month. By
June of 1973 then, four
candidates should receive their
Ph.D. degrees and by the
following year another should
complete requirements for the
Ed.D. degree.

The inaccuracy of the
statistics from which the State
Council has drawn its
unwarranted assumptions are
in the process of being
corrected by Dean Frederick
Cyphert and other University
officials. I trust that the facts
presented here testify to the
University community not
only the existence of this
relatively new program but also
to its health.

The steadily increasing
number of applications to this
program, our growing national
posture, and the commitment
to the program of our past and
present students lead us to
believe that we are alive and
well in spite of the recent
announcement of our demise.