CUE Debates Holding Midterms on Housing Day

Students, faculty, and administrators discussed the timing of midterm exams on Housing Day at a Committee on Undergraduate Education meeting Wednesday.

During the meeting, Undergraduate Council Vice President Dhruv P. Goyal ’16 told committee members that many undergraduates dislike taking exams on Housing Day, when freshmen receive their upperclassman housing assignments amid College-wide festivity. Last fall, Goyal, a former UC Education Committee chair, and his running mate clinched the UC’s top leadership positions on a platform that included the abolition of midterms on Housing Day, which is typically scheduled for the Thursday before spring break.

Pointing to recent course cancellations during shopping week, however, Goyal acknowledged that efforts to modify the timing for this year’s Housing Day will likely be challenging.

“This semester, it almost seems impossible,” he said. “If any change has to be made, it would only be instituted for next year,” Goyal added after the meeting.

Still, Goyal said faculty and administrators who attended the meeting seemed open to discussing retiming Housing Day so as to avoid potential conflicts with midterms. They discussed two possibilities: starting Housing Day festivities on Thursday afternoon, instead of the morning, or moving them to the Friday before spring break, Goyal said.

After the meeting, Goyal said scheduling Housing Day on that Friday could present additional problems for students, specifically student-athletes, who often leave campus beforehand. Goyal said he will continue advocating to move Housing Day or reschedule midterms on that day with administrators, including House masters, the Freshman Dean’s Office, and the Office of Student Life.

The meeting also featured a prolonged exchange on the General Education program, which is currently under review.

UC representative Michelle S. Lee ’16 asked administrators at the meeting why certain introductory courses, referencing the Anthropology department in particular, do not fulfill Gen Ed requirements. Lee, who is an inactive Crimson news editor,  also questioned the rationale for enforcing the same, full set of requirements for all students, regardless of what they are studying.

The Core Curriculum, which preceded the Gen Ed program, granted exceptions to certain requirements depending on an undergraduate’s concentration.

Administrators present at the meeting argued that Gen Ed courses serve to encourage students to connect material to broader questions in the world rather than strictly introduce them to a discipline, according to Lee.

“Not all courses that are introductory could or should be Gen Ed courses,” said Daniel E. Lieberman ’86, chair of the Human Evolutionary Biology department.

—Staff writer Noah J. Delwiche can be reached at noah.delwiche@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @ndelwiche.