6/10/97

It is my decision that Ohio University will continue to base its academic calendar on the quarter system for the foreseeable future. This is in keeping with the recommendation of the Calendar Study Task Force, which has conducted a thorough investigation of this matter under the leadership of Provost Sharon Brehm.

Although I recognize and respect the point of view of those who would prefer a semester calendar, I also concur with the conclusions stated by Provost Brehm in summarizing the factors that led to the Task Force's recommendation. In the charge to the Task Force last fall, I asked that they consider such matters as community concerns, faculty and staff development, personnel concerns such as our early retirement program, plant utilization, student employment opportunities, state subsidy, and use of between-term time on campus and off. Most importantly, however, I asked the Task Force to determine whether there is a compelling academic reason for making a change. The Task Force found no credible research evidence that student learning is affected by the structure of the academic calendar. Furthermore, they found no clear evidence that there are any significant financial implications associated with one calendar system as compared with the other.

The cost of changing calendars, however, is not insignificant, particularly the investment of faculty and staff time. I concur with the Task Force's conclusion that the time, effort, and money required to make a calendar change could be better spent on other University activities and initiatives. On another matter, we are mindful of the interest of the local retail business community in having a university calendar that would keep students in Athens during the holiday season. Countering that, however, is the interest of our students in having employment opportunities elsewhere during that season and the interest of faculty who appreciate a concentrated period for research. It is my hope that in the future Ohio University will offer more short courses during December to provide options for students who wish to utilize that time for academic progress, but that "the December factor" is not one that should decide the academic calendar for the University.

There are issues that have surfaced as a result of this study that fell outside the purview of the charge given to the Calendar Study Task Force, including matters of course structure and flexibility in the allocation of student and faculty time. Some of these issues have more association with student learning and the academic climate on the campus than the calendar itself, and we will be addressing them as we continue to search for ways to make learning more engaging for all at Ohio University.

I am grateful to the 32 people who have worked diligently and conscientiously as members of the Calendar Study Task Force throughout this academic year, and I commend Provost Brehm for her leadership of this effort.

Robert Glidden
June 10, 1997