The Registration, Records and Calendar committee met today to discuss projected schedule changes to future academic schedules. As part of its recommendations, the committee is submitting a proposal to Provost Larry Nielsen in the coming week to institute reading days for the 2009-2010 academic year. Students have advocated for reading days for many years now, so with the proposal on the table, Nielsen shouldn’t drag his feet on this issue. Instead he should hasten this process, so we can implement the changes as soon as possible.
Reading days would take place during Dead Week and would give students a much needed break during this hectic part of the semester. During these days no formal classes are held and additionally, students would have the opportunity to attend special review sessions. Whether students use reading days as a break from classes or as an opportunity to get more studying in before exams, reading days would undoubtedly reduce stress and improve student morale. These enhancements would also certainly improve students’ grade performance on exams. The advantages unquestionably outweigh any possible drawbacks.
Thus far, Nielsen has been receptive to the idea of reading days and has expressed his willingness to enact any proposal the Registration, Records and Calendar committee submits. By approving the reading days proposal before the end of the semester, Nielsen will be paying credence to the clearly articulated desires of the student body. A petition organized by Student Senator Amber Joyner most recently expressed these sentiments as it had more than 1,700 signatures. This is a statement that cannot be ignored and officials should continue to respond quickly and efficiently.
If the proposal for reading days is made official for the 2009-2010 academic year, it will affect students that are at the University right now. There is no reason for Nielsen to delay his decision on this matter. By respecting the wishes of the student body, Nielsen will demonstrate that University officials are indeed responsive to student desires. Those sophomores and freshmen who advocated for this change will see their voices have been unheard and it is realistic to imagine changes on campus.
