It was well-accepted when it started, but the First Year Seminar Program, which has been in place for five years and has received mixed reviews from faculty and students, is up for a review that could lead to significant changes by the next academic year.

The university has not come to any conclusions about the future of the program, but the eleven-member First Year Seminar Committee has been charged with reviewing the program and submitting their recommendations to the Academic Policy Committee, which oversees the university’s curriculum.

“We’ll determine one of two things: the system is great as is, or the system needs improvement and we can change the program,” said health science professor Si Pearman, chair of the First Year Seminar Committee.

The seminar committee met for the first time Monday, but Pearman said it will probably take several meetings over the course of the year to arrive at their recommendations.

One of the minor changes Pearman said his committee could recommend would be to standardize the seminars in some way since students have reported that the workload varies significantly between different seminars.

On the other hand, Pearman said the committee does not want to infringe upon professors’ freedom to teach the First Year Seminars as they best see fit.

Pearman also discussed the possibility of major changes to the program that would move one of the seminars to sophomore or senior year or abolishing one seminar altogether.

“There are a lot of possible things to come out of this,” he said.

However, Pearman emphasized the importance of writing-intensive classes like the First Year Writing Seminars, which he suggested were unlikely to go away.

He also said that he likes the small class sizes for seminars and that seminars provides an opportunity for first year students to connect with their peers and their professor.

In undertaking their review, the seminar committee will be considering a range of information, including input from a recent faculty retreat and student evaluation data.

The seminar will also be considering a report issued by the Academic Program Effectiveness Committee at the beginning of the school year that summarizes and evaluates all the various assessments Furman has done on the program, including course evaluation data.

The report states that overall the effect of the program on students was only “slightly more than small” and that faculty support for the seminar program is “not compellingly positive.”

Starting the First Year Seminar Program required a large commitment on Furman’s part, and since the program began in 2008, Furman has hired 15 new faculty across multiple departments to help teach the additional courses.

In their report, the Academic Program Effectiveness Committee said one of the goals for the university’s review of the program should be to examine to what extent the objectives of the program have been realized and whether the program’s benefits justify its expense.

The Academic Policy Committee would need to approve any recommendations the seminar committee makes before putting the proposed changes up for a faculty majority vote.

“Any change in curriculum is a big deal so the whole faculty has to be involved at that point,” said Ken Abernethy, chair of the Academic Program Effectiveness Committee.

On the First Year Seminar committee is 7 faculty and 2 students

Margaret Caterisano (THA)

Kevin Hutson (MTH)

Steve O’Neill (HST)

Andrea Tartaro (CSC)

Margaret Oakes (ENG)

Si Pearman (HSC), Chair

Paul Thomas (EDU)

Diane Boyd (Resource)

Marianne Pierce (Administration)

Students: Katie Fearington, Caroline Lancaster