Tlte Cwuydjbm^ ^owumjJL Volume XI, Number 22 The Student Newspaper of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte Charlotte, North Carolina February 24, 1976 Creative Arts evaluated By Sara Bullard “The Creative Arts program suffers from a self-imposed isolation.” “The BCA and the Rowe Building seem to be a closed society.” The present structure of the Creative Arts Department is “administratively inefficient and confusing.” “There is little - communication between Creative Arts faculty.” These were some of the observations made in a 120-page report by the Creative Arts Review Committee, appointed in February, 1975, to conduct a thorough evaluation of the Creative Arts Department. The committee, composed of faculty and staff within and outside the department, based their findings and recommendations primarily on interviews and questionaires. Their critique identified the major problems of the program to be: --imprecision and inconsistencies concerning methods and goals, --isolation and lack of communication within and outside the department, --conflict among factions and individuals within the department, and -general lack of understanding of the program. “Serious threats to the health of the Creative Arts program,” the report says, “stem primarily from the feelings resulting from the confusion about the program within the department and the generally unsatisfactory interface between the departpient and the remainder of the campus. “...the tension and animosity which currently exist in the department are causes for great alarm... the polarization of feelings and attitudes severely interfaces with the ability of the program to function effectively as an administrative unit and as an educational environment.” A subcommittee on administrative analysis, headed by Dr. Sherman L. Burson, concluded that: -the goals of the BCA program are not consistently understood by the staff, faculty, students, administrators of the program and by others outside the program. -•Administrative structure and procedure of the department are imprecise and not .clearly understood by- members of the department. "The Department of Creative Arts does not function effectively as an organizational unit. "The administrative structure is not appropriate for the achievement of the program’s goals. No one really seems to know what the goals of the BCA program are supposed to be, according to the subcommittee on academic standards and requirements, “...the program goals are nowhere precisely stated...there is variance among faculty in the priority and interpretation of the goals...as a consequence of this variance, faculty evaluation of students is uneven.” A conflict between two factions in the department is a major source of this variance, the report says. One group insists that “personal growth” be the first priority of the program, while the other group maintains “artistic competence” is, ihe most important goal. “This is especially true in the music area,” the report says. “A student can get caught between two music factions.” Confusion over the process of evaluation results from this conflict, according to the report, and places “in jeopardy...much that is valuable in the Resent unstructured program of Creative 7he suspicion has arisen,” the report states, “that Creative Arts is somehow in another world.” This isolation problem is attributed to the confinement of arts activities to the Rowe Building, the inability of BCA majors to enroll in courses outside the department and the inadequacies of the department’s service role to non-majors. These last two factors are now being dealt with, according to Luca DiCecco, chairman of the Creative Arts Department. BCA majors are now allowed, on a limited basis, to take courses, outside the department. In the past, majors were only permitted to audit courses. Dr. DiCecco said the regulation was made before he came to UNCC, but he is not sure what the purpose of the restriction was. “I honestly don’t know whether it involved a consideration of what the program needed, or what the computers could do.” Several potentially large enrollment courses are being designed, according to DiCecco, in response to the review committee’s criticism that the department has failed to fulfill its service role to non-majors. In addition to the evaluation by the Creative Arts Review Committee, a study of the BCA program was done in April 1975 by three consultants from the N.C. School of the Arts, the University of Minnesota and Julliard School of Music. The general conclusions of the consultants, according to DiCecco, were that “there wasn’t a common understanding on what and how to achieve (in the program), there are misconceptions...and an inability on the part of faculty and students to work with the program and a need for structure.” “The consultants were only here three days,” DiCecco added, “By and large it would be difficult for them to understand the program.” Dr. Philip Hildreth, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, called the consultant’s report “privileged information” and refused to release it, although he said the consultants did not specify the distribution of the report be limited. A synopsis of the consultants’ major recommendations was provided. Among those recommendations were: -The BCA program should be continued, provided “educational requirements of the University as a . whole” be met. ■ -A departmental faculty-student committee should be appointed to “assess the program...generate specific proposals...and to rearticulate aims and orientation of the BCA.” “Music and art appreciation and history courses should be reinstated. "At least the first year of the program should be partially structured. "Faculty in the department “must be in support of the program as designed and instituted,” and complaints against faculty members should be dealt with. "Fraudulent reports and serious questions concerning faculty accountability have occurred.” There is a need for a more efficient grading and crediting procedure. (The “fraudulent reports” according to Hildreth, concerned students who were given 'credit without the 'authorization of the departments involved. He did not specify the faculty involved and said that to his knowledge no punitive actions were taken.) --“Continued financial investment is important...and additional administrative staff appears necessary.” --“Arts should not be confined to the Rowe Building.” Both of the evaluations recommended the Creative Arts Department make alterations in the program. The department is expected to delineate these changes in a cumulative report by the end of this month. “Its unique that a department with its program has given itself to this kind of broad evaluation,” DiCecco said. “Departments are usually enclosed and reluctant to be evaluated from outside. I’m going to be pushing as hard as I can for every other department to have this kind of evaluation...its a very healthy thing.” Hildreth agreed more evaluations of this type are needed, but said specific plans have not been made to implement them. Nelson speaks at %iving with less^ By Steve Bass Clifford Nelson, U.S. State Department officer in charge of Population Affairs in the Bureau of Oceans and Environmental and Scientific Affairs, spoke to about 130 people in the Lucas Room February 12 on the topic, “Economic Facts of Life: Living with Less.” Nelson’s speech, along with the ensuing symposium, was sponsored by the Political Science Department and the Friends of UNCC. Nelson was introduced by Dr. Nancy Joyner, organizer of the symposium, following opening remarks by Chancellor D.W. Colvard and Dr. Schley Lyons, chairman of the Political Science Department. Nelson, speaking in a ramblir^, informal style uncharacteristic of Washington officials, opened his remarks •by asking the audience, “Who do we live with? We’ve always felt that our country could produce enough, and our people industrious enough to supply our needs. How much further can we go? Are we to extend to 2/3 of the world our standard Photo courtesy of ^ Political Science Department of living. More is not necessarily better, we must look at the quality of the world.” Nelson, whose foreign service career has included assignments in Frankport, Salzburg, Jidda, Tunis, Sailsburg, Saigon and Cairo, then discussed the topic in relation to his world experience. “Never have I heard a less developed country say that the U.S. should drink less coffee, or use less copper. Most of the countries of the world like our standard of living. Very few have workings of civilization, technological management and the government climate to achieve it.” Nelson stressed the need for social mobility so, “that the son of a shepard will not necessarily have to be a shepard.” Nelson continued by statitig the key to the problem is the exploding world population. “Our goal would be to have about four billion people in the world. (but) if we run at the same rate we will have about seven billion people by the year 2000. In the United States, I think we will cope with the problem rather well. Currently our country is expanding at a rate of about .6 or .7 per cent per year. If we could (in the U.S.) level off at about 275 million, we’d be all right.” The exploding areas of Asian countries according to Nelson are beginning to practice birth control, “except Burma. If countries like India and Pakistan do not limit births, their death rates will begin to increase also.” Nelson concluded by saying the United States will have to assist the underdeveloped countries of the world development; the question is how much assistance the. U.S. will offer and what types of aid the United States will offer. “The question is, will we send food, or more guns?” Conference pleases Joyner Clifford Nelson. By Brad Rich The recent “Living with Less” conference, cosponsored by the Department of Political Science and the Friends of UNCC, was termed successful by Dr. Nancy Joyner who was responsible for much of (he program’s organization. According to Joyner, the department . was pleased with attendance, especially that of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg area branch of , the American Association of University Women (AAUW). She added, however, she was a little disappointed that more of the Friends did not attend, saying, “I think people who organize an event should attend their event.” “The featured speaker, Clifford J'Jelson of the U.S. State Department, could have structured his remarks more,” said Joyner. “He rambled quite a bit, but generally seemed comfortable with the audience and enjoyed the atmosphere of the university.” Dr. Joyner felt the afternoon session was by far the highlight of the conference. The AAUW brought the most challenging questions she felt, and the UNCC professors who spoke captured the important aspects of the discussion well. Especially interesting she felt was Dr. Arnold Caan’s discussion on the psychological attitudes of adjusting to living with less. Dr. Joyner felt two sentiments were expressed, “one, that of status quo - the people who will not change until forced and two, those with an affinity to change. These people are the ones who are beginning to adjust,” she added. Dr. Joyner said the Friends of UNCC and some of the faculty members are eager for this conference to be merely the first in a series. She said many important facts were brought out in the discussion that should benefit the community in the long run. These benefits may not be visible all at once but at least incrementally they should be helpful;

Page Text

This is the computer-generated OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It may be empty, if no text could be automatically recognized. This data is also available in Plain Text and XML formats.

Return to page view