Over the next month, high school, CEGEP, and international students alike will submit their university applications to McGill. As these applications are finalized, however, the McGill to which they are applying will look less and less like the one that we have come to know. Last week, Dean of Arts Christopher Manfredi announced that the faculty of arts is planning to cut upward of 100 classes in the 2013-2014 academic year. This move indicates that the school’s focus and priorities are increasingly abandoning its students’ interests, and that decisions are being made by an unaccountable McGill administration.
McGill is, first and foremost, a university. Students attend McGill for the quality of education that it promises them, and for the diversity of classes offered. They attend this school because of its reputation as a world-class institution. If McGill hopes to maintain this reputation and to continue to appeal to the calibre of student that it seeks to attract, it must recognize and respond to students’ priorities.
These priorities include a personalizable education experience, relationships with professors, and the opportunity to engage directly in classroom discussions—all of which are made possible by smaller classes. Although McGill is a large school with inevitably large classes in any faculty, we, as students are able to justify this with the promise of smaller, more focused upper-level classes which afford us the opportunity to determine the specific direction of our degrees. Limiting this option effectively diminishes the value of our education. For the school to do so without consultation is deceitful, and cannot be tolerated.
Dean Manfredi alleges that these cuts are in response to student calls for a higher number of courses taught by full-time instructors. Even if this is a prominent concern among students, the faculty’s response is inappropriate. Full-time instructors should not come at the expense of a diverse range of courses. Furthermore, the Tribune’s editorial board, made up mostly of arts students, recalls no consultation process, nor do we believe that such a consultation would have seen approval for this solution. This was a unilateral decision by the administration that will have direct repercussions for students, current and prospective alike.
In Fall of 2013, professors will be forced to teach larger and more general classes, an experience which can be just as frustrating and alienating to instructors as it is to students. Many part-time course lecturers stand to lose their jobs as a result of this restructuring. Teaching Assistants (TA), who share a union with course lecturers, also oppose this move, in spite of a promised increase in their resources. This is a situation in which nobody wins.
The faculty of arts insists that the restructuring is not financially motivated, and that all savings accumulated from the changes will be returned to students in the shape of more academic advisors, TAs, and internship opportunities for students. These cuts must therefore be understood outside the context of a school under financial strain, and recently saddled with heavy budget cuts. That it is a voluntary reallocation of funds means this move reflects the values of administration. Thus, our issue ultimately comes back to priorities. The projects and priorities that McGill deems worthy of investment are what will ultimately come to represent it as an institution. As of now, education is not among them.
While the Tribune is dismayed both with this decision and its implications for McGill students, we must stress that if these changes are, in fact, inevitable, then the successful reallocation of funds must be immediate and highly visible in the coming school year. We need to see a significant decrease in the wait time for an advisor, and a distinct improvement of the TA-to-student ratio. If the administration is promising internships, then they must be proactive in making these opportunities known, and accessible to students. If such results aren’t evident, then this becomes a far greater issue— one of trust between students and their administrators.
This is just the latest in a series of instances in which the administration has demonstrated a blatant disinterest in the wishes, needs and rights of students. Each of these serves only to further dictate the direction in which our university is headed. With McGill’s application season right around the corner, now is timely moment to ask yourself: “Is this a McGill that I would apply to?”
Dean Manfredi will be addressing questions about these cuts at an AUS Town Hall meeting today, Tuesday Jan 22, at 16:00 in the Arts Lounge, Leacock B-12.
