One of my colleagues pointed out an article in Profession 2004 written by an MLA committee on the issue of building programs in English and attracting more students. The article turned me on to this NSF site that makes available a range of statistical information. Over the past day I've been playing with it to see how we compare with our "sister schools" in the SUNY system: Brockport, Buffalo, Oneonta, Oswego, Potsdam, Plattsburgh, Purchase, New Paltz, Fredonia, and Geneseo.
So here's the thing. On average, nationally, English BA's make up just less than 5% of all degrees conferred. According to the statistics available on the NSF site, 8 of our sister schools are at or above the national average (the most recent year available is 2001, so things could have changed). We are well below and it looks like we have been well below for at least the last 15 years. This isn't really news in my department. The professional writing program in which I teach was created largely to attract new majors into the department, which it is beginning to do. However, we're restricted in size by the fact that there are only three faculty and obviously all of our courses are of the small, writing intensive variety.
Our largest program is in Secondary Education, which reflects Cortland's overall strength as an education school. However, examining our sister school programs, I've noticed that there are not many that are larger than we are. Departments that have 3-5 times the number of regular English majors have roughly the same number of secondary education majors. This led me to a hypothesis.
There are two structural limitations placed upon the growth of an English secondary education major:
- The availablity of high schools in which students can do their student teaching.
- The job market for English high school teachers.
I'm guessing that while some growth might be possible in this program, I don't think it could be dramatic. Cortland is in a rural area; there are only so many high schools. Yes Syracuse and Binghamton are 30 miles or so away in opposite directions, but there are major universities in both of those cities, each with their own Secondary Education programs. Of course my hypothesis might be wrong and I'd love to know if it is.
So that leaves professional writing and our very traditional English major. Here are a couple things the article from Profession suggests (and I quote):
- strengthening curricular cohesiveness; adding attractive topics courses, including courses that enhance students' vocational preparedness; and developing popular concentrations, such as creative writing...
- enhancing department visibility through publications, Web sites, active recruitment...
- integrating computer technology
Now there are some other suggestions related to assessment, advisement, and having faculty recruit students from intro and gen ed courses. In a way the department is already doing these things; that is, we are doing them in professional writing. And professional writing can and will continue to grow, but I don't think it will ever be larger than 50 majors, even if we hire more faculty. The reason I say this is that it takes a special kind of student to actually major in writing. I mean, it's a lot of writing. Also, the idea of a writing degree is still relatively foreign, especially compared to an English degree.
On the other hand, an English degree that included some writing, even just as electives,might be popular. Right now our PWR degree is 36 credits of PWR and 9 credits in literature. If we made our degree 12 required PWR credits and 24 elective credits, including taking up to 9 credits in literature, and English revised its literature degree to allow students to elect to take up to 9 credits in professional writing.
Would that work to make both degrees more desirable?
The tension around here stems from the shell shock of working in a program that has never been successful, that has always struggled to find students. We partly have strict requirements because we have some faculty with traditional values. However, it is equally the case, if not more so, that we have these requirements as a way of ensuring that students show up for certain classes.
That is, the scarcity of students has shaped the curriculum. However it is quite possible that the strict traditional curriculum reproduces the scarcity problem by keeping students away. At least that is what one might hypothesize based on the MLA report. It is also what one might guess by examining our sister schools, where five of the six most successful programs have quite open curricula, and three of the four at the bottom, including us, do not.
IF we had plenty of students and we scheduled the appropriate number of classes, everyone's course would fly. It's true that students might eat up creative writing or a course in contemporary literature in film or the narrative of video games or whatever you could come up with. However English majors also tend to value the classics, and I personally believe they would enter Chaucer or Milton or what have you with more verve if they could also take some non-traditional courses. A course in Web Design isn't going to overturn the department. After all, I'm the only one who can teach it and I'm only available to teach it once a year.
No doubt it would be a gamble. If we created substantial electives, we would need to shape our program through careful course offerings and thorough advisement, especially in the first few years as we fine-tuned the curricula.
But here's the kicker...it still will not really work until the campus culture shifts. Of course, this is a big part of what the MlA committee suggests (and which I elided above): "programs that involve collaboration with alumni, student clubs, admissions offices, secondary schools, local businesses, and career planning and placement offices." And I would also add, at least in our case, collaboration with other departments like Art, Philosophy, History, Communications, and so on.
Recent Comments