Accommodate students' schedules, not departments'
By Richa Bhala '07
While the rest of the campus is abuzz with pre-registration chatter and giddy with the prospect of new courses chosen and new leafs turned, I cannot approach course registration with anything other than dread. Every other page in my course booklet is marked, my list of possible classes spans several pages and, paralyzed by indecision, I simply cannot choose.

But my panic has abated with successive pre-registration cycles. It has dawned on me that I don't need to choose anything at all. Rather than whip myself into a frenzy examining the merits of each course and professor, I let the time slots be the deciding factor. Without fail, half my possible courses get the ax because they all meet at the same time.

My own psychological issues aside, this clearly is not the preferred method of course selection. The Committee on Educational Policy (CEP) is considering alternatives to the current scheduling process to alleviate the timing crunch.

A wholly unscientific analysis of the spring schedule reveals intriguing patterns in the Amherst course timetable. There are nearly twice as many 2 p.m. classes as there are the next-closest preference, 11:30 a.m. Professors seem to show particular affection for Tuesday at 2 p.m., which holds nearly five times as many courses as the proximate yet unloved 1 p.m. Thursday at 2 p.m. isn't quite so alluring, and though crowded, it hosts just over half as many classes as its Tuesday counterpart. Of course, there is great neglect of the early morning time slots, with classrooms at 8:30 and 9 a.m. practically uninhabited. And the weekend hush falls early on the quad, with a noticeable drop-off in Friday classes around 2 p.m.

Baffling scheduling quirks mark the trends within departments as well. Among the History department's 22 spring course offerings, three will meet at the exact same time: Mondays and Wednesdays at 2 p.m. Another three will meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays at 2 p.m. (This is in addition to the hordes of other courses, as previously mentioned, scheduled for this popular slot.) Yet, there are many times when only one history course is scheduled (10 a.m.), and no classes are scheduled for Friday at 2 p.m. (I will rely on the CEP to perform a rigorous quantitative examination of time slots, adjusting for the numbers of students enrolled in each class, which my unsophisticated tallying method could not encompass.)

It doesn't take much scrutiny to realize that there's something inefficient in Amherst's course allocations-anyone who eats at Valentine at 12 p.m. on Mondays or 1 p.m. on Tuesdays knows that well enough. If there is a method to the madness, then the registrar's office should make clear its rationale for the bizarre allocations. An explanation would prevent the predictable griping of the student body at pre-registration, not to mention harangues from know-it-all writers. Otherwise, until the College stops allowing professors and departments to dictate classroom and class-meeting-time selection, the course schedule will continue to frustrate student attempts to select an ideal slate of classes.

We must implement a more systematic way of scheduling courses. The registrar should have free reign in assigning times and rooms to maximize even distribution of classes among the time slots and classrooms. Two of my four classes are in the Merrill lecture halls this semester. Surely, there are other, under-utilized classrooms on campus. Plans to expand classroom space at Amherst are premature unless we are already making full use of all classrooms, which is clearly not the case. Certain classes do merit special equipment or space considerations, and of course, the registrar should accommodate them. But we cannot indulge baseless whim when the schedule is already so crowded.

Allocation alone will not solve the problem. The CEP plans to encourage the shift to thrice-weekly classes, as 74 percent of classes currently meet once or twice a week. This shift must be executed from above. The registrar should determine the optimum balance of class meetings and implement it immediately. Of course, there are some subject areas where the number of class meetings affects the learning experience-math and foreign languages, for example. But I cannot perceive any ill ramifications from requesting that a few professors update their syllabi, meeting thrice weekly for 50 minutes, rather than twice weekly for 80.

Filling more early morning time slots is also a very effective, though moderately evil, way to lessen the number of course conflicts. Placing major requirements at those times ensures enrollment.

Beyond these simple measures, Amherst should consider a pre-registration without the courses already scheduled. Students could then choose any four courses their hearts desire, without time conflicts as barriers. Then the registrar could schedule the classes, minimizing the number of students who will not receive their first-choice slate. Though more students may have to shop classes, at least the schedule would best reflect the desires of the student body, guaranteeing that the greatest number possible is satisfied.

Most of these changes aren't controversial; they're just common sense. It is high time Amherst maximized use of classrooms and timeslots through a computerized allocation, rather than maximizing the choice of departments and professors. Yes, this does steal a degree of control from professors, but it is not out of spite or an autocratic spirit. There are too many classrooms, timeslots and courses-an embarrassment of riches-that only a centralized system can effectively manage. There are sacrifices on all sides-more morning classes for students, less decision-making by professors and ample pre-registration hysteria-but enabling students to select an optimal education should be this institution's first priority.

Bhala can be reached at

rsbhala@amherst.edu

Issue 12, Submitted 2004-12-01 15:57:31