Broad scale of change in soda options concerns reader

Dear Editor:

I agree wholeheartedly with Professor Mont Hubbard's opinion (Dateline letter, March 12) that it is now "impossible" to purchase a normal sized refreshment on the UC Davis campus. In Human Resources, we also were recently subjected to this "improvement." I'm not sure how others feel about the additional eight ounces of soda. It seems a bit in excess to me, and I certainly resent the 50-cent price increase.

I was not aware that the machines were replaced all over campus, however, and the scale of this really concerns me. It is especially frustrating in light of the fact that similar machines outside of retail giants such as Wal-Mart offer colas at 40 cents each.

I would be curious to know who maintains these contracts with outside vendors and why price increases are hitting campus at a time when employee salaries are frozen and people are losing their jobs.

-- John Slate, human resources

Teachers should not have to apologize for making coursework palatable

Dear Editor:

A letter to the editor in the March 12 Dateline caught my eye. The writer described his experiences and concerns about undergraduate education at UC Davis, especially a lack of motivation to learn on the part of today's undergraduate students. The writer stated that "a major part of the problem is the merit/promotion system for faculty," pressuring faculty to be popular with students to obtain good evaluations.

It would be unfortunate if readers concluded: that favorable student evaluations somehow are associated with an inferior learning experience; that favorable student evaluations equate more with an easy class or easy grading than with a faculty member who has worked hard to create a positive learning experience; or that faculty merit-review committees are unfamiliar with both the usefulness and shortcomings of student evaluations.

Praise for an instructor's clarity, organization, and ability to explain difficult concepts is more likely to describe a faculty member who devotes scarce time and energy to preparation for his/her classes than a faculty member who's trying to win a popularity contest.

Students frequently comment that they are motivated to attend classes where the instructor stimulates the students. Effective teachers need not apologize for working to make course material palatable to students. While numerical ratings may not accurately reflect the effectiveness of some good teachers, written comments by students frequently distinguish between faculty who strive to be effective teachers and those who do not.

As a past member of both my College Personnel Committee and the campuswide Committee on Academic Personnel, I believe faculty members on these committees understand the appropriate role that student evaluations should play in faculty merit review. I also believe these committees attempt to identify the occasional situation where student praise is based on something other than teaching excellence. Blaming a faculty merit process that attempts to reward good teaching for perceived ills in undergraduate education is misguided.

-- Gary Anderson, professor and chair, animal science

Excess focus on high enrollments lowers faculty morale

Dear Editor:

Professor Les Ehler has put his finger on an important issue when he states that "There is too much pressure on faculty to be popular, to have a popular course (i.e., high enrollment), and to have contented students who will give good evaluations" (Dateline, March 12).

This problem is particularly acute in the humanities, where the criteria for grading are less clear than in the sciences. For years one colleague of mine solved his grading problem by giving straight As to about 98 percent of his students. Needless to say, his enrollments were extraordinarily high until a responsible colleague brought the matter to the attention of the administration.

Another colleague reported that, by the end of any quarter, only about one third of the students in his class were showing up for his lectures (yet most of his students continued to receive passing grades).

In a recent conversation in the Sproul Hall elevator I heard one professor say to another: "Yes, she is an excellent teacher because she has very high enrollments."

The pressure to achieve high enrollments contributes to the "dismal state" of undergraduate education at UC Davis. It also lowers morale among faculty committed to teaching quality courses.

One of my colleagues (a full professor) teaches as many as four courses in a single quarter in order to bring up his numbers. Another colleague left for another university because she could not tolerate the enrollment pressure. As for me, I am taking an early retirement this year, in part because of the number crunchers in the office of Humanities, Arts and Cultural Studies.

-- Daniel Rancour-Laferriere, professor of Russian

UC should not deny eligible freshmen when others aren't pulling their weight

Dear Editor:

The unprecedented decision to refuse admission to all eligible California freshmen (as reported recently by the media) constitutes a serious attack on the credibility and moral standing of UC.

The decision to deny regular admission to 3,200 eligible students would have been unnecessary if the Academic Senate and UC administration would act according to the bylaws and regulations of the university.

The UC administration, acting as the delegated agent of the Academic Senate on this matter, seems to refuse to dismiss students who have been on the dismissal list for several quarters.

I contacted every college at UC Davis and received from the various dean's offices the number of students on their respective academic probation, disqualification and dismissal lists. At least 14 percent of currently enrolled students were listed. Furthermore, the campus should fully implement the minimum progress regulation that requires every full-time student to carry a load of at least 13 units per quarter, averaged over three quarters.

Two years ago, I wrote to the Davis Division of the Academic Senate denouncing the serious lack of supervision in matters pertaining to the minimum progress and the academic probation and dismissal regulations. At that time, I warned that lack of action on this front would have denied some eligible California students their rightful admission to the university in place of some clearly undeserving students.

Even now, little concrete seems to emerge in spite of the draconian decision to refuse admission to 3,200 students.

-- Quirino Paris, professor, agricultural and resource economics