The criticisms of the college establishment that former Middlebury College president John McCardell made in a New York Times editorial raise valid questions about typical university practices. We have to wonder, though, why he didn't change these things when he was in the position to do so.
As a college president, McCardell could have tackled the problems he saw in the tenure system and the importance placed on faculty-student ratios. It's easier for him to write it in an editorial now, instead of risking his reputation to make serious changes in the university system. Still, many of his points should be considered.
The tenure system is flawed. We approve of giving job security to professors, especially since they don't make very much money and their job is very important. Unfortunately, tenure can cause some professors to stop providing quality instruction to their students. Staying in a teaching position at AU should be dependent on student evaluations. Tenured professors should be re-evaluated by the university if, after receiving tenure, they consistently receive negative evaluations from students.
We also agree that the faculty-student ratio doesn't really matter. Average class sizes are a better measurement for prospective students but still shouldn't be considered that important. Some small classes are awful and some large lectures are incredible; class quality depends a lot on the professor and not just the size of the class.
Another good indicator of quality that McCardell mentioned is the frequency with which faculty eat meals where the students do. AU professors tend to be separated from the students, which hurts the relationships their students have with them. Professor Campbell, who moved his office to McDowell Hall, and Professor Richardson, who lives in Anderson, both deserve praise for their extra effort to be more accessible to students.
