Careful consideration required before credit limit
Note: This editorial appeared in the Feb. 24 issue of the Thresher, but was not published online until March 22, as shown. This clarification was added April 28.
Rice students often joke about how they seem to be taking more classes than their friends at similar universities; it turns out that for many, this observation is actually true. This finding, one of several by the Committee for Undergraduate Curriculum, points to a university environment in which students feel pressure to take a heavy course load. While students are certainly entitled to challenge themselves, this competitive culture negatively affects many students’ mental health and education quality.
With this in mind, the Thresher supports the CUC proposal to reduce the credit hour cap to 18, and 17 for freshmen. A lowered cap decreases the average hours in which students enroll by allowing them to feel more comfortable with taking the number of courses best suited for their abilities and less pressured to approach a potentially unmanageable maximum. A lower limit additionally drives students to carefully consider their classes instead of loading up on courses they plan to drop, a good first step toward reducing the overcrowding in many classes.
Of course, it is true there are often circumstances in which a student must take many credit hours: A student trying to graduate early for financial or personal reasons may need to make up a course they failed earlier or may simply want to explore outside their major. A reduction in the credit hour cap must be accompanied by major changes to the process by which to appeal for overloading above the limit, especially considering the needs of students without AP or IB credit. Currently, such appeals are rarely approved. The process should be made easier and more flexible, and with no unappealable maximum.
A lower cap will be especially important for freshmen. New students are often unaware of a university’s academic rigor, and many insist on taking more than the recommended 15 hours. The current checks in place, such as peer academic advisors, have no real say over how many hours new students choose to take. Although freshmen have the freedom to drop courses until the last day of class first semester, taking more hours than is manageable often manifests in high stress and poor grades before then. A limit at 17 hours signals that a smooth transition is a priority for Rice and forces freshmen to reflect upon their ability before undergoing the appeals process.
These proposed changes have admirable intentions, but those alone are not reason enough to institute them. The Student Association Senate must ensure that this conversation reaches the colleges and student body since the changes would immediately and significantly impact all undergraduates. It is important to understand the reasoning and motivation of students who have taken more than 18 hours or who have applied for above the proposed unappealable maximum of 21, as well as the academic and personal outcome of their choices.
More from The Rice Thresher
Proposed constitutional changes — or power grab?
Four months ago, the Student Association formed a special committee to review its constitution. Two days ago, members of the committee presented their findings, suggesting four major changes to functionally, they say, streamline the SA’s efficiency — granting them “ultimate authority” over Blanket Tax Organizations like student media and Rice Program Council, and eliminating BTO perspectives from the committee that disburses some $300,000 every year.
Students should prioritize American patriotism
A threat to American values has grown rapidly in recent years: the anti-war movement’s shift to an anti-military stance, calling for divesting from, and in effect dismantling, the defense industrial base. The hyperbolic language found here should alarm Rice students because the U.S. military needs those same companies to develop critical technologies in the functioning of U.S. defense.
Consider ethics while designing AI major
From a little-known concept among researchers to generating summaries with every Google search, artificial intelligence’s accessibility has skyrocketed over the past decade. However, its innovation comes at a cost. Training ChatGPT-3 was estimated to generate 552 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, more than the emissions of 559 flights from London to New York. Artificial intelligence can also steal from artists and reproduce racist biases from its data sets.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication by The Rice Thresher.