A Response to WSSU Administration’s Views of the Institution Sylvia A. Flack, Ed.D, RN Feeling compelled to speak out about the value and the strengths of Winston Salem State University, this article represents only my views and not those of the university or any segment of the university. Lately, many distortions have been published about the institution. It is very damaging when unverified negative information is released in public media. Sharing my views is an effort to counteract the negative press. I am both a graduate and a supporting alumnus with twenty-five years as an employee resulting in documented positive impacts on WSSU. My experience from having served WSSU as an associate dean of nursing, dean of the School of Health Sciences, special assistant to Dr. Harold Martin, former chancellor of WSSU, and currently as executive director of a research center empowers me to speak about the university. My involvement within the community of Forsyth County also adds credibility to what I am compelled to say. My view of WSSU is in direct contrast to that which has appeared in the media recently. The criticism of low expectations, low student quality, faculty and student low performance, lack of faculty engagement, outdated curricula and lack of quality improvement is NOT what I have experienced nor witnessed. There is always needed improvement at any university and that is why Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC) and academic program accrediting bodies require institutional assessment and evaluation. In several reports, it has been stated that WSSU has not changed its curriculum in 50 years and claimed that WSSU is lacking in liberal arts education. Informed academic leaders and academicians know that universities would not remain accredited by SACSCOC or academic accrediting bodies unless the curricula reflect currency and relevancy. WSSU has received in prior years some of the most coveted accreditations including AACSB International for the School of Business. It is very easy to blame the students, faculty and staff for concerns and issues within the university. On December 19, 2014, the WS Journal published an article listing student allegations about WSSU faculty in the areas of advising, class management, teaching methodology and requirements for outside classroom activities. The Journal reported that students allegedly complained that faculty members have poor attendance at faculty meetings, committees and department meetings and university activities. My questions about the statements are this article are: (1) Why are students reporting that faculty members do not attend faculty meetings and other activities?; (2) How did the major changes in the advising system and changes in general education requirement implemented within the past 5 years factor into these reported problems?; (3) What’s the role of the academic advising service in University College and Life Long Learning (UCall)? Why are students having difficulty getting advising when in past five years the university renovated a building to house the 20 staff and faculty members known as class deans, academic advising services and academic counselors as well as the lifelong learning staff?; (4) What are the results of student evaluations of faculty versus what “some students reported”?; (5) What have chairs and deans evaluated and recorded about the faculty’s requirements for outside classroom activities versus “some students reported”?; (6) What strategies have been implemented to assist faculty and students to billed mutual trust?; and (7) If research is important to liberal arts, why hasn’t it been supported in recent years? If the faculty is apathetic as describe in the article, the question becomes why. What happened to transform an excited, enthusiastic and outcome achieving faculty to an apathetic faculty? What will resolve these faculty issues? Is the answer to this question to act on hearsay or unverified data or is the answer to try fairness, transparency, shared academic decision making, truth, clarity of policies, and allocation of more resources? Should the faculty be provided opportunities to develop skills in working with the students that enter WSSU? Is the faculty informed when changes are made in the Faculty Handbook? The belief that WSSU did not have a history of engaging in liberal arts education before 2007 is hard to accept. As early as the 1960s, documents show that liberal arts were integrated into the curriculum offerings. Since that time, there have been departments, programs, and courses in arts and sciences and the humanities at the institution. Additionally, there have been student learning outcomes such as critical thinking, communication, and analytical and problem-solving skills, and the application of knowledge and skills in real-world settings. The faculty engaged in integrating student learning outcomes and curricular themes such as multicultural/global perspectives in both lower and upper division courses beginning in 1994 under then - Chancellor Cleon F Thompson and continued under the tenure of then - Chancellor Harold Martin from 2000- 2006. These outcomes, initially referred to as abilities, are documented in WSSU catalogs published in 1995-2010. Faculty and student research has always been a priority at the institution. The life science and social science faculty received many grants and collaborations and used them to mentor large numbers of undergraduate students in research. Dr. Wilveria Atkinson, from the 1970s to 1999, promoted integration of research into the curriculum and teaching methodology. Like most chairs and deans, Dr. Atkinson had high standard for her students. She expected them to be high achievers and prepared them to become medical doctors and dentists. The Center of Excellence for the Elimination of Health Disparities and the Center for Community Safety have documented evidence that both junior faculty and students have been heavily involved in real life training in the community. In fact, the only new thing about liberal arts at WSSU currently is the creation of the Department of Liberal Studies and moving existing program into that department. Also, the requirement for 60 hours of general education courses focusing on learning outcomes instead of the 45 is new. According to an interview in the News Argus, the merger of the College of Arts and Sciences and the Schools of Business and Economics and Education and Human Performance came about so that the students in business and education would get more liberal arts courses. Any major changes to the curricula and degree programs in education and business should be at the discretion of the faculty and influenced by standards from their respected accrediting body and not because of the need to promote liberal arts at WSSU. Like the programs in the School of Health Sciences, professional programs in education and business and economics began an intentional process to integrate student learning outcomes such as critical and analytical thinking into their curriculum beginning in 1990s and continuing. One criticism promoted that has been advanced since 2007 is that WSSU admits “poor quality students”. What a negative characterization of students! This theory is refuted with a review of the data for applications, acceptance and enrollment of freshmen in the last several years. I noted that a large number of freshmen apply each year and a large number of those meeting both WSSU and the UNCGA criteria are accepted. Lately, however, only a very small percentage of accepted freshmen enrolled for classes. The WSSU Fact Book shows in Fall of 2013 that 4,194 freshmen applied and 63% were accepted but only 27 % enrolled in classes. If the students who enroll meet the increased enrollment criteria, why are they being called poor quality students? The numbers of freshmen that are admitted as well as the university enrollment have been steadily declining since 2008. In 2008, the enrollment was 6,442. From that point, there has been a steady decline in enrollment to 5,220 in the fall 2014. Institutional Assessment & Research has received questions from UNCGA about the 25 percent decrease in graduate enrollment. These are serious administrative problems, that were not discussed which have resulted in reduced state appropriations. Prospective students and their parents pay close attention to what is being said about their future university. Have the undergraduate and graduate enrollment goals been derailed by the characterization of “poor quality students”? History shows that students, graduates, faculty, staff, alumni and the community have pride in their university and contribute to its perpetuity in many ways. History also shows that WSSU has always been the vessel to a better life for many people from many backgrounds and life situations. As someone who knows the significance of WSSU to the community and the students served, our direction must focus on assisting our students in achieving their educational goals. This is important not only for our students, but also for the future of our county and nation.
Posted on: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 18:56:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015