• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

The Faculty Executive Committee of the UCLA College is considering a proposal to change the late-drop policy for non-impacted courses.

Currently, undergraduates are allowed to drop non-impacted courses through the fourth week of the quarter with no transcript notation. Drops between the last day of fourth week and the final exam require a pro-forma petition and result in a transcript notation (e.g. “Course Dropped – Week 8”).

Under the revised policy, students would be allowed to drop non-impacted courses through the fourth (or perhaps fifth) week, and later only by a petition documenting extraordinary circumstances. The deadlines for dropping impacted courses or adding courses would not be changed.

Many College faculty believe that an earlier drop deadline is in the best interest of our students. Why?

An earlier deadline would be more fair. As it is now, an engineering student has only until the fourth week to drop a math class, while a biology student in the same class has until the 10th week. That’s not fair. Revising the policy would level the playing field.

And what about “grade shopping”? Students who are financially well off but not doing as well as they’d like may be able to drop a course late and simply retake it, while students who are working their way through school may not be able to afford either the extra fees or the extra time to stay five years. Shopping for grades shouldn’t be common practice, and the ability to do so shouldn’t relate to the ability to pay.

An earlier deadline would also increase access to classes. Demand for many classes is high, but because of budget cutbacks, access is limited. A student who stays enrolled in a high-demand course for nine or 10 weeks and then drops it is taking a seat away from another student who is committed to completing the course.

Additionally, wait-listed students would get better access. This is important at times like now, when resources are scarce.

An earlier deadline would improve the quality of the educational experience. By allowing a course to be dropped up to the final exam, the current policy has the unintended effect of enabling deferred decision-making around papers to be written, books to be read, etc. The current policy encourages absenteeism, as students know they can simply drop the course the day of the final.

The educational experience is far better when the participants are fully engaged with the course and fully committed to learning throughout. An earlier drop deadline would encourage students to commit to their courses earlier and manage their study time better.

In sum, many faculty believe that an earlier drop deadline would be more fair, and would provide greater access and a higher-quality educational experience.

The Faculty Executive Committee will discuss the policy and decide whether to implement changes at its May 6 meeting. Any revisions to the current policy would take effect in the 2005-2006 academic year.

Garrell is a chemistry professor and Faculty Executive Committee chairman. Knapp is a musicology professor and Faculty Executive Committee secretary. E-mail comments about the proposal to the Academic Affairs Commission at aac@ucla.edu.