The Rice Thresher

Location: http://the.ricethresher.org/news/2005/03/25/selfscheduled_exams_decision

March 25, 2005 > News > Self-scheduled exams decision will wait until next semester

Self-scheduled exams decision will wait until next semester

By David Brown | Thresher Editorial Staff

Action on a proposal to eliminate self-scheduled exams, which has been under consideration for a year, has been put on hold until the fall.

Vice President for Enrollment Ann Wright initiated an evaluation of the exam system in March 2004, in part because self-scheduled exams are difficult for the Registrar’s Office to coordinate, she said.

Wright, who oversees the Registrar’s Office, said the idea of eliminating self-scheduled exams has also appealed to many faculty members, who dislike the current exam system because it makes their grading period short.

However, improvements in last semester’s administration of self-scheduled exams and calls for more student input have slowed the progress of the proposal, University Standing Committee on Teaching Chair Michael Gustin said.

‘We thought it looked like we needed to have a broader discussion,’ Gustin, a biology professor, said.

Wright presented a proposal for revising the exam system to the Teaching Committee Nov. 30. The committee made recommendations on Wright’s proposal but never voted on a final version to send to the faculty for a vote. Instead, ProvostEugene Levy will now decide when to submit a modified version to the faculty, Wright said.

‘It’s all going to be kicked into next year, when I hope there will be a decision made about all this,’ Wright said. ‘Self-scheduled exams definitely will be available for this spring and probably for next fall.’

The Teaching Committee has discussed reducing the minimum class enrollment required for a scheduled exam from 50 students to 25 students. Another possibility is to randomly assign each undergraduate class an exam period during which a scheduled exam would take place or a take- home exam would be due.

Wright said adding an evening exam slot and posting exam schedules at the same time as course registration are also possibilities. A suggestion to shorten the exam week has been ruled out, Wright said.

Rachel Gelman, one of two undergraduate representatives on the Teaching Committee, said while dropping self-scheduled exams might ease the burden on the registrar and adding random exam week deadlines for take-home exams might help faculty, the plan could inconvenience students. ‘At least with self-scheduled exams, you could decide when you wanted to take them,’ Gelman, a Will Rice College junior, said. ‘Under this proposal, you’re stuck with what they give you.’

Gelman said she thinks students prefer the increased flexibility of take-home exams over scheduled exams. She said she has contributed to a faculty survey, to be conducted by Director of Enrollment Administration Diane Havlinek, to determine which type of exams professors would give under two scenarios: If all take-home exams are due at the end of exam week or if take-home exams are due at randomly assigned times during the week.

Havlinek is out of the country and could not be reached for comment.

Wright said she is interested in determining how faculty will respond to the different proposals.

‘There were still questions about self-scheduled exams and how eliminating the exams would affect the overall choice that faculty might make,’ Wright said. ‘That’s one of the reasons we’re not going ahead right now.’

Levy said he is in the process of gathering input on various possibilities. He said most students and faculty support eliminating self-scheduled exams.

‘The principal issue that’s been a concern is that the self-scheduled exam process is used almost never, and it doesn’t work when it is used,’ Levy said.

In the fall, 85 percent of courses had either a take-home final exam or no final exam. Of the remaining 137 courses, 89 had scheduled exams and 48 had self-scheduled exams.

Wright said finding proctors has been a consistent problem with self-scheduled exams. The Student Association is responsible for recruiting more than 100 student volunteers to proctor the exams, and when those volunteers do not report to their assigned rooms, staff members from the Registrar’s Office are forced to proctor the exams.

Wright said proctoring improved last semester.

‘It’s been better recently because we’ve made a big fuss about it,’ Wright said. ‘And the mechanical part of it has been going better.’

Former SA Internal Vice President Dustin Stephens coordinated the SA’s effort to enroll student proctors for fall exams. Stephens said the SA made changes to the proctor system, and the registrar’s office only had to send a proctor replacement three times.

‘First, I set up a more aggressive reminder system for people who signed to proctor,’ Stephens, a Wiess College senior, said. ‘Secondly, I inflated the number of proctors per session, assuming one or two would be late or a no-show, and this was in addition to two alternates.’

Stephens said he supports eliminating self-scheduled exams because the system is contrary to the principles of the Honor Code.

Wright said she will consult students outside the Teaching Committee, including the SA and possibly the college presidents and other students, before progressing with the proposal. ‘There hasn’t been enough opportunity for student input,’ Wright said. ‘It would be a big change for Rice, and students would have to feel okay about this.’

If Wright asks the SA for input, SA president James Lloyd said he and the SA Senate will determine how to gauge student opinion.

‘I think we will bring it to the Senate, and depending on the response, determine whether it will warrant a full forum just devoted to self-scheduled exams,’ Lloyd said.

End of article

Back to top