Cornell Alumni News - eCommons@Cornell - Cornell University

Sproull on Undergraduate
Education
The Vice President for Academic Affairs talks with
Thomas L. Tobin and Arthur W. Brodeur, Director and Assistant
Director, respectively, of the University's Public Information
Staff, about the steps being taken to improve the quality of undergraduate
education.
• Over the past several years the students, faculty, and administration
of Cornell have indicated mounting concern
over the quality of undergraduate education at the university.
In two earlier articles, [December 1965 and January
1966] the NEWS outlined major areas of concern and some
of the changes being studied as a means of enriching the
undergraduate program. In this article, the NEWS interviews
Robert L. Sproull '40, PhD '43, vice president for academic
affairs, to determine what progress has been made in this
critical area. In addition to his duties as vice president for
academic affairs, Sproull serves as both a member and the
planning staff of the University Commission on Undergraduate
Education. The commission, made up of students,
faculty and administrators, was formed in October, 1965.
Since that date the commission has met almost on a weekly
basis during the last and current academic years.
Q. Is concern for the quality of undergraduate instruction
new at Cornell?
A. Certainly not. My own experience dates back only to
1938, but then it was perfectly clear that the individual
faculty members, department chairmen and deans were
giving tremendous attention to this. The difference is that
attention has been focused in the last three years partly by
events off campus, but partly by our student protests in the
spring of 1965. It especially became focused by the Kahn-
Bowers faculty committee which devoted the summer of
1965 to taking stock of inadequacies, wherever they could
be found, in undergraduate education.
Q. What is the relationship between the university commission
on undergraduate education and the Kahn-Bowers
committee?
A. The Kahn-Bowers committee was a committee to investigate,
to appraise, to recommend. It was not intended to
make changes in undergraduate education. Its report, however,
since it was full of careful appraisal and wisdom,
deserved to be followed up. And that's where the university
commission comes in. The commission is acting as a continuing
organization set up to improve the quality of undergraduate
instruction.
Q. Who are the members of the university commission?
A. There are three students, three faculty and three administration
members, plus the President or provost who
presides. The faculty members were chosen by the dean of
the university faculty; the students by the Executive Board
of Student Government and the administration members by
the President.
Q. Who decided to include students on the Commission?
A. The university faculty voted on the crucial question as
to whether students should be included. There was some
uneasiness among many of the faculty about including students.
I have to admit that I was somewhat uneasy myself.
The students, in fact, have been highly productive members
not only in telling us of student attitudes and evaluating
probable student reactions to suggestions, but also as a
source of productive ideas.
Q. Is the commission the most significant force working
for the improvement of undergraduate instruction at Cornell?
A. No. The commission is only the most visible. Probably
the most significant force is simply the increased attention
May 1967 19