I would like to commend Kevin Murray for his article concerning our lost hour of class time. This mysterious "fourth hour" seems somewhat archaic on the course outline as it reads to say students are just being given more homework under a different name. That is, unless you know the history. This extra homework is a feeble attempt to replace a missing hour of classroom interaction.
Kevin is not the only student who remembers the benefits of the in-depth instruction allowed by two hour discussions rather than the condensed milestone lectures that occur now.
Exchanging class explorations for additional readings, videos, forums, and the like is a poor deal. I congratulate the faculty that have been able to adapt their two hour lectures into ninety minutes well, but find no fault with those that have not. While I concede that some instructors have done better than others and that these activities can be useful, I have yet to hear a single positive comment about the switch. In fact, I remember little solicitation of student feedback though I know the student union opposed the shift throughout.
While I understand the administration's motivation to achieve maximum occupancy in classes, I find this focus on the bottom-line disturbing. There is always a need to maintain awareness of cost savings, but when it is the quality of education that suffers as a result, an educational institution must wake up and remember the reason for their existence.
Regards,
Trevor Page
