the Informer

Students expressed a fulfillment with academics at the University during an open forum conducted by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC).

The forum was held as part of the evaluation of the University in order for it to get its accreditation renewed. The evaluation process occurs once every 10 years and examines all aspects of the University.

Four NEASC representatives ran the forum by getting feedback from students focused on academics, but touching on all aspects of the Hartford experience. Students expressed their appreciation of things like the honors program, attesting to the fact that “you really get out what you put in,” according to one participant. Students were also appreciative of the fact that the University allows non-honors program students to take the same level courses if they so choose.

The students didn’t share their thoughts on academics without any qualms, however. All-university courses proved to be a hot topic stemming from a discussion on course selection. When asked whether they found AUC’s interesting, some agreed, while one student described them as “a double-edged sword…it was interesting, but I would have preferred not to have taken it.”

Another student in the audience said “I’m paying to take classes I don’t want to take…they should limit the amount of general education requirements students have to take.”

The AUC debate came to a quick close when one member of the NEASC board explained that schools are “mandated to have 40 credits of gen-eds if they want to be accredited and this university sees the AUC as a major component of that.”

A similar tone was felt when students got on the topic of professors. “Nine times out of 10 there’s really great professors” one student said. “But sometimes there’s one god-awful teacher and it’s hard to get away from them if you really don’t like them.”

While others expressed the difference between adjunct and tenured teachers based on performance and availability (tenured being the preferred of the two), senior Dave Hernandez offered a suggestion for improvement.

“I think a better system of teacher evaluation would be helpful,” he said. “It seems like teachers get their positions based on accomplishments outside teaching an have a hard time relaying the information.”

When asked about things they’d like to see changed at this institution, the conversation quickly moved away from academics and in the direction of food services and residential buildings.

Many students agreed that they felt they were paying too much for the meal plan. Junior Yaeli Lifshutz said “academics are very expensive here, but I feel like I get my money’s worth…I don’t feel like that at all with my meal plan.”

Senior Ian Baxter agreed, saying of the dining locations on campus “it seems they spend a lot on aesthetic upgrades but don’t do a lot to the substance.”

The benefits of the University aside from academic aspects didn’t go unnoticed as the forum eventually ran out of time while students were commenting about things they enjoyed.

“There’s a lot of great resources that are underutilized,” senior Sara London said.

Baxter agreed, adding that the school is very “real world and future oriented, they’re really geared toward helping students get experience and jobs.”
Among other positive aspects students pointed out were psychological counseling as well as the plethora of clubs and activities students can participate in.

The NEASC representatives will be at the University for the remainder of the week, determining how well the University’s mission and value statements are being played out.