For the 2005-2006 academic year Thanksgiving break will start at the beginning of the week to accommodate students who must miss classes to travel home for the holiday, a change that has sparked controversy after it was presented at a recent Faculty Senate meeting.

Although the Faculty Senate approved the registrar and provost’s decision to test this change, several faculty members disapproved of the way the issue was handled during the most recent meeting.

“The proposal was brought up not as a motion, but as an announcement by the provost,” said English Prof. Robert Polhemus, chair of the Faculty Senate. “This caught many people off guard and raised certain controversies over the issue.”

Polhemus explained that the Faculty Senate did not have an official vote on the matter. The registrar asked the senate to vote informally, which Polhemus noted, is not binding.

The Faculty Senate will hold a formal vote next winter to decide whether or not to permanently change the academic calendar.

“Since the issue was brought to the Senate in such an irregular manner, people were displeased,” Polhemus said. “It would have been better if we had had more time to discuss the issue, but I doubt that the results would have been different.”

Robert Simoni, professor of Biological Sciences and member of the Faculty Senate, on the other hand, was happy with the way the issue was discussed.

“It’s my understanding that this is an administrative issue and no faculty vote is required for the changes to pass,” he said. “I think we should give credit to the provost and registrar for even bringing the issue to the senate.”

Applied Physics Prof. Malcolm Beasley agreed.

“The provost brought up the issue and this led to a good discussion about the effects it would have on the faculty and the students,” he said. “Changes to the calendar, regardless of how they are brought up, will cause trouble.”

Other faculty members said they were worried about the temporary nature of the proposal.

“I was concerned that the provost said we would try this new calendar for one year,” Beasley said. “If we change the calendar now, the worst thing we can do is change it again next year.”

The short notice given to the faculty about these changes caused further controversy, since several academic departments have already planned events and retreats for the following year.

“Our department plans around the academic calendar, so we expect it to be set,” Simoni said. “We only get six months notice before these changes come into place and that’s not enough time to rearrange our schedule.”

Overall, the Faculty Senate responded positively to the new calendar proposal, and a majority said they were in favor of the changes during the informal vote.

“Attendance during the days before Thanksgiving break has always been poor and many classes are usually cancelled,” Simoni said. “This is an honest attempt to fix that problem.”

Although he was not happy with the way that the issue was brought up at the meeting, Polhemus was equally enthusiastic about the proposal.

“Some people might be against the changes in the schedule, but it’s a small minority of the faculty and an even smaller minority of the students,” he said.

To compensate for the extra vacation days, classes will begin the first Monday of fall quarter instead of Wednesday.