Co-curricular credit is a constant at Andrews. Emails about opportunities pour in almost daily, designated times at the university are devoted to offering them, and, for many students, how and where they’re going to fulfill their credits is constantly in the back of their minds. I hear much conversation among students about co-curriculars. In such a regard, I polled students about their feelings towards Andrews’s co-curricular policy.
We can find intent for co-curriculars in the 老司机传媒 Student Handbook 2022-老司机传媒 2023, "A Whole Person Approach":
“As part of earning an 老司机传媒 degree, graduate and undergraduate students have many opportunities to engage in faith and learning opportunities outside the classroom. These complement academic courses and allow students to document valuable skills and dispositions desired by employers.”
I asked Taylor Bartram, the Assistant Dean for Student Development, what the purpose of residence hall co-curriculars is, and he answered thusly:
“The intended purpose of residence hall co-curricular engagements is really the same as the overall rationale for co-curricular engagements across campus: to enhance each [student's] experience by providing growth opportunities outside of the classroom setting. We want our students to be prepared for life after AU, and that doesn’t just include classroom knowledge. It’s important to us that our students are well-rounded and [have] skills for navigating the workplace and life. This could be seen in a program that helps nourish your faith such as a worship service or in a program that helps prepare you for the professional world like a workshop with Career Services. The list could go on, but the general principle is that it should complement classroom learning.”
Utilizing these two quotes, I sent forth a poll to my fellow students. The questions posed, answers given, and elaborations elaborated are arrayed below.
The first question I asked was, After reading the two statements above, do you believe that the co-curricular policy meets its intended purpose? The response to this question was fairly evenly split, with seven responders (53.8%) responding no and six (46.2%) responding yes.
When asked to elaborate, Talitha Ramirez (junior, mechanical engineering) replied, “They lose their meaning and usefulness and become a burden . . . In addition, I feel that many of the programs are not practically useful or helpful as the above policy describes.”
Alternatively, Bianca Loss (sophomore, elementary education) said, “I’m answering yes because I think that co-curriculars do offer growth experiences. For example, I got to start using sign language in a co-curricular, which could be very helpful in the field of education.”
The second question posed was, Regardless of your answer regarding their effectiveness, do you enjoy most co-curricular activities? Again, responses varied – this time with eight (61.5%) responses to the contrary and 5 (38.5%) in affirmation. A smattering of elaborations are here given:
“Most of them are frustratingly disruptive and boring.” - Nora Martin (junior, psychology and English)
“It really depends on which type of co-curricular we’re talking about. Chapels need HEAVES of improvement, residence hall credits also need to be more interactive and thought out as they always seem very lacking and unintentional. Other services such as Proximity and other vespers are great!! Those hit the spot just right.” - Hailey Prestes (junior, architecture)
“I enjoy the co-curricular activities I choose to attend. The more ‘specific’ co-curricular activities like dorm or chapel credits are a little more stressful though.” - Alannah Tjhatra (senior, biochemistry)
In culmination, I asked, Are you satisfied with the co-curricular policy as a whole? This time, nine (69.2%) replied no and only four (30.8%) replied yes.
Regarding this question, Ellie Dovich (junior, communication) said, “I am mostly satisfied with the co-curricular policy, but I wish there were fewer required attendances. If there were less, then I could pick and choose co-curriculars that sound interesting to me and ones that fit my schedule better.”
Noelle Koliadko (junior, Mathematics and Computer Science) responded, “I’m not super unhappy with it. I just think that maybe chapel credit should be offered more often so I don’t have to stress about getting them all in before needing the time to study for finals etc.”
To aggregate additional data, five responders specifically mentioned the co-curricular system causing stress; six indicated co-curriculars to be frustrating, boring, or a burden. Many cited being busy as a prime reason co-curriculars are stressful and/or said more opportunities should be provided at more times to flexibly fit students’ schedules.
Speaking on how to improve co-curriculars, Dean Bartram said, “First, as staff, we need to be striving to offer high-quality experiences that are relevant to our current culture and need. Second, students need to take ownership over their growth in their time at AU . . . your growth is mostly contingent upon your approach and how you engage. Your time is short here, so make the most of it!”
A similar, yet slightly differing, perspective on student responsibility was offered by Bianca Loss: “We paid to get an education. If the point of co-curricular opportunities is to enhance education, then isn't that something we've already paid for? Students can choose to make use of them or not, just like we choose to use the CTC or Wellness Center.”
As a senior, every year I’ve heard students voice their dissatisfactions with co-curriculars; the request to lower the required amount is akin in my mind to the request to lower Gazebo prices in their perennial recurrence. Fortunately, unlike Gazebo prices, progress can be made with co-curriculars! Students continue to advocate—Bella Hamann recently wrote an article in the Student Movement proposing a better system for chapel credits—and administration seems to be listening. Steven Yeagley, Assistant Vice President of Student Life, told me, “We are giving review to this question [of what is the purpose of co-curriculars] and will be going into a co-curriculum redesign process.” Hopefully, a policy that works for more students can be put into place and continue to be updated as students speak up!
The Student Movement is the official student newspaper of 老司机传媒. Opinions expressed in the Student Movement are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors, 老司机传媒 or the Seventh-day Adventist church.