College of Technology administrators met with disgruntled students Tuesday to resolve curriculum changes that were expected to delay graduations.
The group of computer engineering technology seniors voiced complaints at the Jan. 28 Student Government Association Senate meeting.
The students informed the Senate of alterations made to their degree plan and said they were given insufficient warning of the changes.
‘With the economy the way it is and the rising cost of a college education, many students can literally not afford to stay in school longer than they originally anticipated,’ SGA Sen. At-Large Van Hua said.
Students previously able to take their senior projects courses (ELET 4308 and ELET 4208) concurrently, suffered when the new computer engineering technology degree plan stipulated ELET 4308 had become a prerequisite for ELET 4208.’
The change meant students taking the course in one semester would be required to finish it in two. For some, this meant they would have to wait an extra semester to take the course to graduate.
The College of Technology sent an e-mail to its students on June 6, 2008 with details on the new degree plan. The e-mail stated that the one semester version of the course would be offered for those planning to graduate in fall 2008.
The department issued letters to students, posted the information on its Web site and asked professors to make announcements during classes, said Carmen Carter, director of student affairs for the College of Technology.
Hua, SGA President Sam Dike, Vice President Jonas Chin and Speaker Alexander Obregon faciliated communication between the students and academic officials including Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Fred Luellen, academic adviser Carlo Deason and College of Technology Dean William Fitzgibbon.
As a result of Tuesday’s meeting, the College of Technology will allow students who were on track to graduate in fall 2009 to take elective courses in place of the ELET 4208.
‘Students who are on track to graduating with an approved degree plan would be given a workable pathway to graduate,’ Fitzgibbon said.
David Harden, a computer engineering technology senior, planned his degree fall 2005 but was placed into a class after the final add date to allow him to graduate on time.
While Harden admits the problem could have been dealt with more efficiently, he said the college’s willingness to meet with students and offer alternative courses was a step in the right direction.
‘The college should honor the degree plan people come in on,’ he said.
Fitzgibbon said the altered computer engineering technology degree plan was prompted by the continuously changing industry of technology.
‘It’s not like we’re teaching Shakespeare,’ he said. ‘Technology changes. We do update our curriculum and industry leaders feel these changes are pertinent.’
Fitzgibbon said resolving the degree plan issues with students was a high priority for him.
‘Some curriculum changes are perfectly seamless; some seem to be more disruptive,’ Fitzgibbon said. ‘It’s obvious we’re limited by some communication problems because our students are a varied lot. We have transfer students, students from a range of backgrounds and most of them work.’
Fitzgibbon said he expects any residual problems with the altered degree plan to be ironed out by spring 2010.
‘It would be fool hardy to say these problems will be fixed completely, but I hope we would have resolved the issues for the eight to 12 students affected within a week,’ he said. ‘I don’t want this lingering atmosphere of discontent.’
