North
The Committees on
Liberal Arts Education Central
and Teacher Education
News
Bulletin
THE SHAPE OF THE EMERGING UNIVERSITY
ONE Co.oPERATlVE VENTURE : THE COLLEGE OF
SAINT BENEDICT- SAINT JOHN'S UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC EXCHANGE PROGRAM
A PROGRAM TO ENCOURAGE INNOVATIVE TEACHING
NOVEMBER, 1967
•
ONE CO-OPERAT
COLLEGE OF SAINT BENEDICT - SAINT JOHN'S UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC EXCHANGE PROGRAM
Sister Firmin Escher*
Beginnings. In March of 1963, representative faculty
members from Saint John's University, Collegeville,
Minnesota and the College of Saint Benedict, Saint
Joseph, Minnesota constituted a Steering Committee to
discuss plans for developing an Academic Exchange
Program. Some cooperation had begun some ten years
earlier in the Sociology, Art and English Departments,
but the program was a small one and was used for emergency
measures predominantly.
Background of Institutions. Both Colleges have S1m1-
lar backgrounds and are conducted by men and women of
the same religious order, namely, the Order of Saint
Benedict. This fact gives the two colleges a common
bond, a common spirit, upon which to develop a cooperative
program. The short distance between the two
institutions, only four miles, is another favorable
factor. That one college is for men, the other for
women, provides a complementary quality which is regarded
as a strength. One institution has excellent
library and science facilities; the other, extraordinary
fine arts facilities.
Many questions occupied the meeting time of the members
of this first committee as it attempted to find
ways to interest both faculties in developing a cooperative
program; i.e., Why should there be duplication
of faculty departments? When upper-division courses
have small enrollments, why should both colleges offer
the same courses? Do both institutions need to offer
the same majors?
Department Meetings Begin, 1963. On March 21, 1963,
19
the chairmen of departments from both colleges convened
to become acquainted with the idea. After a general
meeting. the chairmen met on a departmental basis and
then returned to the total group with suggestions and
recommendations concerning their particular discipline.
These departmental recommendations were reviewed by
the Steering Committee. A list of courses along with
the names of faculty members who would be teaching on
both campuses was developed.
A questionnaire was circulated to faculty members of
both campuses to determine the measure of interest in
a more expanded cooperative plan. Since the response
was favorable. the two registrars were advised to
schedule the classes and receive registrations. The
presidents and business managers arranged such matters
as faculty salaries, tuition and transportation.
In that first trial year, the program offered upperdivision
courses in some departments to students of
both campuses to increase enrollment in these classes
and to share experienced professors. Students traveled
to the neighboring campus in most caseSj the professor
sometimes taught on the neighboring campus and took his
students with him, if the enrollment warranted it. It
was recommended that there would be mutual agreement
by both chairmen of a like department concerning any
cooperation within a department.
A tuitional figure for a credit hour was agreed upon
and an exchange of actual tuitional dollars occurred
at the end of each semester. A faculty member. teaching
on the neighboring campus, received one-third or
one -fourth of his salary from that institution depending
on the number of credits taught. Transportation
was arranged to accommodate the number of students
who traveled between campuses. The schedule of joint
classes was a fairly simple one in 1962-63.
In the second year of cooperation. simplicity began
20
to change to complexity. About 70 students from both
colleges were registered in fifteen different classes
in each semester of the academic year 1963-64. The
class period was identical on both campuses. This
created difficulties for the student since he needed
to be free on his home campus both before and a f ter
his scheduled class on the neighboring campus. Scheduling
classes became more difficult . Transportation
needed to be smoother. The time of vacations on both
campuses required an identical calendar. Some departments
were waiting to see how the program would develop
before attempting to be a part of it. The most successful
part of collaboration thus far was faculty exchange.
Though the program was growing, there were still knotty
problems.
Cooperation advances, 1964-65. In 1964-65, more students
were traveling between campuses, more departments
were cooperating in the program, more faculty were
teaching in two colleges. The first combined major
developed during this year was Communication and Theatre.
A student pursuing this major was required to
take major sequence courses on both campuses, but the
degree was conferred by the college in which the student
is formally enrolled. The offerings of both campuses
were printed in the Bulletin of each school.
The Bulletin, 1964-66 published during this year,
described the CSB-SJU Academic Exchange Program as
follows:
A program of cooperation exists between Saint
John's University and the College of Saint
Benedict. Students from either school may
elect courses from a list of shared offerings
approved by the administration and the
department chairmen of both institutions.
The program permits some sharing of faculty
and facilities.
Since there is a mutual recognition and approval
of the offerings of the two institu-
21
tions, a student may pursue a major or minor
in a course of study on the neighboring campus.
which is not offered on the student's home campus.
The degree is conferred by the institution
in which the student is formally registered.
Examples in point are majors in political
science and theology and a minor in
psychology. areas of study at Saint John's
University which may be pursued by students
enrolled at the College of Saint Benedict.
The Communication and Theatre sequence is an
interinstitutional major. requiring students
to fulfill requirements by taking specific
courses on both campuses. The offerings of
both institutions appear in this Bulletin.
Summer Study Committee. 1965. During the summer of
1965, a committee of six faculty members, three
from each college, was asked to study the cooperative
program and to make a report and recommendations
to the presidents and faculties of the colleges. The
committee was called the Joint Summer Study Curriculum
Committee; the title is important since it suggests
that the program began to take on wider responsibilies.
Committee members limited their deliberations to three
areas of concern:
1) the Non-academic Aspects of the
Exchange Program
2) Curriculum Study
3) Honors Program
The recommendations presented to the presidents
and faculties at a Joint Faculty Orientation meeting
in September, 1965, are printed here as direct
quotations from the Report and Recommendations of
the Summer Study Curriculum.
Concerning the Non-Academic Aspects of the Exchange
Program:
22
•
Recommendation 1: That the two colleges provide an
adequate, that is a regularly scheduled, form of
transportation between the two campuses, and that
this transportation be shared by both colleges,
each responsible for its part of the expense and
operation.
Recommendation 2: That the two colleges set up coordinated
class schedules: specifically. the College
of Saint Benedict will begin its classes at ten
minutes to the hour and end them at twen ty minutes
to the hour: Saint John's will begin its classes
on the hour and end them at ten minutes to the hour.
Recommendation 3: That the two colleges adopt an
identical calendar for the academic year:
identical as to the dates for the beginning and
ending of each semester, for all holidays and
vacation periodS, and for examinations.
Recommendation 4: Part i--That the two colleges collaborate
in publishing a joint announcement of
courses, no later then 1967-68.
Part ii--That the two colleges
request all of the respective chairmen of
like departments to continue to make arrangements
for further academic exchange during the academic
year 1965-66, and thereafter, i.e., joint
departmental course offerings, joint course
descriptions, same credits (units), etc.
Part iii--That for its joint
announcement of courses, the two colleges should
adopt a new course numbering system, one clearer
and more flexible.
Recommendation 5: That the two colleges arrange for
a joint committee for major convocations: it
would begin its functioning with the major
convocations program for the two colleges for the
academic year 1966-67.
23
Concerning Curriculum Study
Recommendation 6: That the presidents appoint separate
committees charged with the responsibility of
drawing up and presenting to thpir respective
faculties by the end of the academic year 1965·66
the plans for a revised curriculum to be put into
effect no later than the academic year 1967-68.
Part i--This curriculum will incor·
porate a distribution plan for satisfying general
college requirements.
Part ii--This curriculum will be
based upon a student course load of four, at most
five, full courses (units) in anyone semester.
Recommendation 7: That the two colleges plan to adopt
by the academic year 1967-68 a revised divisional
structure.
Recommendation 8: That the two colleges agree to adopt
the following admission requirements. In addition
to any already in effect: two high school years
of foreign language; a CEEB achievement test in
English; and two other CREB achievement tests.
Recommendation 9: That the two colleges should encourage
their respective Theology Departments of other
institutions for the development of a qualifying
test to be included among those administered by
the F·ducational Testing ~ervice.
Concerning the Honors Program
Recommendation 10: That the presidents appoint a
Joint Honors Council, with three members from
each of the colleges, charged with the responsibility
of drawing up and presenting to the faculties
by the end of the academic year 1965·66 the plans
for a curricular honors program to begin during
the academic year 1966·67, as the first step
toward a full program.
24
Curriculum Change. At the joint faculty meeting in
September, 1965, the recommendations were accepted,
and both colleges appointed curriculum committees to
begin serious work toward a closer cooperative program.
During the next two years, there were occasional joint
meetings of the curriculum committees. Each college
developed its study to meet its specific needs but
there was always present the awareness of the needs
of the cooperating college.
In March of 1967, both faculties agreed to adopt a
4-1-4 calendar to go into effect in September of 1967.
This development called for a joint Course Bulletin
with each college printing its own General Information
Bulletin. The chairmen of the academic departments
reviewed all offerings of both colleges and chose a
common course description wherever possible. The
registrars worked out a common numbering system for
courses.
Other Shared Activities. At the present time, the
two colleges conduct the Faculty Orientation Program
jointly. Consultants for academic development are
frequently shared. The freshmen orientation program
is a common experience for the students of both campuses.
Student organizations are cooperative in many
instances.
Facilities are shared wherever possible. Enrollment
in courses in the Academic Exchange Program has doubled
over last year with approximately 270 students
from each college participating. New faculty members
are hired after consultation with chairmen of the departments
concerned. A bus travels from one campus
to the other at eve~hour during the school day. A
joint campus calendar informs students and faculty
of activities and cultural events.
Though there are academic areas in which more cooper ation
can be developed, much progress has been made
25
during the past four years. Several departments are
very close to being one department, following the lead
of the Communication and Theatre Department.
In other areas, cooperation likewise flourished; the
admissions offices have a close liais.on between them;
the registrars must necessarily plan all course lists,
scheduling, and registering jointly.
The January Term in 1968 will be fully coordinated.
For all practical purposes, the colleges will be one
school, one faculty and one student body.
Planning the Next Step. The latest development in the
cooperative program is an intensive study of institutianal
caaperatien at ever, level with in two colleges
supported b.y a faundation grant. A
faculty-administrative committee has been appointed
ta wark with consultants whose background and experience
will assure an objective analysis .of the present
situation and future prospects, and whose recommendations
can be implemented by both colleges for the
betterment of liberal education.
The venture which began in 1963-64 has grown sizeably
in a short span .of years and it is with a nate of
optimism that the faculties face the future in attempting
to develop a stranger liberal arts program
through cooperation.
* Sister Firmin Escher is the Academic Dean of the
College of Saint Benedict, Saint Joseph, Minnesota.
26
