NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/bit/listserv/mbul/6242

Text File | 1992-12-29 | 1.7 KB | 34 lines

Comments: Gated by [e-mail]
Path: sparky!uunet!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!VAX.KVCC.EDU!ADAMS01
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 28 Dec 1992 11:58:29 EST
Sender:       "Megabyte University (Computers & Writing)" <[e-mail]>
From:         [e-mail]
Subject:      RE: Standardizing Composition Classes
Lines: 23

David, Your thoughts on the standardized syllabus are interesting.  I teach
at Kalamazoo Valley Community College, and we have successfully incorporated
a "standardized" syllabus into our programs.  The departmental syllabus is
composed of the college's goals, the learning objectives (established by the
faculty), the number of assignments, and the grading scale.  Each instructor--
full and part-time--incorporates the goals, objectives, and grading scale
into her syllabus.  The specific assignments--type, length, etc.--are left up
to the individual.  Using this standardized syllabus as a point of departure
gives us some uniformity across courses and offers part-timers as well as new
full-timers some help in preparing for their classes.

Having recently worked on revising the departmental syllabus for our
developmental writing course, I can say that getting the right balance
between standardization and enough freedom to satisfy the faculty is a
real pain.  It can't be done if the faculty does not actively participate.
Of course, there are always those who don't contribute at all and are the
first (and most vocal, too) to complain about having their freedom curtailed.
Ron Adams
Communication Arts
KVCC
6767 West O Ave.
Kalamazoo MI 49009
[e-mail]