I attended your meeting with the psychology and political science depts. for the Curriculum Review Committee on April 1. Below are a few of my thoughts on these issues which I didn't get a chance to express in the meeting.

I would support a suggestion to make research experiences for undergraduates a special focus at Rice. It is a mission that fits well with the strengths already in place at Rice. I do NOT think it would be feasible to require this of students; it needs to remain a voluntary pursuit.

Undergraduate research has the advantage of being something that can receive special grants to support student projects. Currently however, there appear to be few funds available to help pay for expenses incurred during independent student research. Several fellowship and grant programs on campus rule out support for pure academic interests. In addition, summer stipend money for the undergraduates as well as tuition reductions would be great incentives for students to participate and feel rewarded for doing so. Currently, there are few positive incentives for faculty to supervise undergraduate research. As far as I can tell, there are no positive rewards for engaging in any type of advising for independent studies because supervising students in independent study courses does not count (officially) as "teaching". As an assistant professor, I am keenly aware that activities for which there are no positive incentives in effect hold negative or disincentives.

Rice does already offer a rather unique college experience, of course, in the form of the residential college system. Students have incredibly high levels of informal contact with faculty at Rice. That contact often leads to direct and indirect academic support for the students. I support efforts to make the faculty associates program more intellectually enriching for the students. It may be feasible to meet several of the curriculum issues through programs conducted at the colleges. Workshops to develop writing and study skills might be conducted through the colleges. This may also be a fruitful venue for multi-disciplinary awareness and discussion. For faculty, however, there are insufficient incentives to participate in the colleges in these sorts of activities. They would require "extra" time and preparation for which the university and specific departments offer little positive incentive. Any program suggestions of these sorts would at a minimum need to be considered "teaching" activity rather than generic service to the university.

You also raised the issue of requiring a course in quantitative skills or writing skills. I would like the committee to discuss whether the freshman year is the most appropriate time for these sorts of required courses. For some skills, sophomores or juniors might be in a much better position to benefit from the courses. And an inspirational course in the junior year might also help foster serious academic study in the senior year (as opposed to the ever present senior slump type of experience).

Lastly, for your information, Barnard College of Columbia University might be a good place to gather comparative experiences. For several years now, they have required a freshman English course, and a quantitative skills course, and have marketed their opportunities for undergraduates to engage in research to good effect.