UNM's Faculty Senate has decided to wait until the fall to implement the proposed Review Week, ASUNM President Jennifer Onuska said.
"The issue isn't dead," Onuska said. "The Faculty Senate is just getting more input. At the end of the semester, representatives from ASUNM and the Senate will meet to make sure the policy meets the needs of both group's constituents."
The Associated Students of UNM has been working on the Review Week plan since fall 2002 and presented the initial proposal to Faculty Senate in September. Onuska said after that meeting, ASUNM took several suggestions made by Senate members and revised the plan. At the November Faculty Senate meeting, a new revised proposal was presented and endorsed by the Senate, but it was recently decided that more time is needed before it can be implemented.
"We decided to wait for more input from faculty members," Faculty Senate President Beverly Burris said. "It is endorsed by the Senate, but is pending due to more discussion with the faculty. We will look at it again in the fall to decide if it needs more revisions based on the discussions we have this spring."
Burris said the first discussion session was Friday and about 15 students and faculty attended.
If the current policy passes next fall, Review Week will occur the week before finals each semester and will require class time be devoted solely to integrating, summarizing and reviewing class material. New material should not be introduced, and tests, quizzes and new projects will not be assigned.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
Also, papers will be due no later than the Friday prior to Review Week unless the paper takes the place of a final exam. In that case, the paper can be due when the final is scheduled. The policy would only apply to 16-week courses on main campus.
Burris said there is support among the faculty to go ahead with Review Week, and it makes sense to have time for consolidation of material before final exams, but there are still some questions that need to be addressed.
"Some faculty see it as an infringement of academic freedom," Burris said. "Others think taking away days to introduce new material takes something away from their programs. And some have raised concerns that the whole idea assumes that all classes give cumulative exams, which they don't."
Onuska said she knew the November endorsement didn't mean immediate action as she had hoped, but said the added time should ensure that when the policy is passed, the transition will go smoothly for faculty and students alike.
"I think it's important that the policy is well thought out, and if it means taking another semester to make sure it's applicable to our campus, then that's the wiser route to go in the long run," Onuska said.
