University to evaluate resident faculty in college houses and residential programs

Professors who live in college houses may soon face reviews on housing policies.

Under the current policy, professors may reside in college houses for an indefinite period of time, College House Academic Programs Director Leslie Delauter said.

“We’ve just never created a system that actually decides when somebody moves out,” Delauter said. “We probably don’t want somebody living in [a college house] for 20 years.”

Delauter believes faculty members who live in college houses should be “really engaged” with students. The “need for consistency” in resident faculty, however, should be balanced with the need for new ideas and faces to interest students, she added.

CHAS is working to establish a system that will review faculty engagement in college houses through student surveys and polls. CHAS is also working to design “a clear set of expectations” to hold resident faculty to, Delauter said.

In addition to engaging students, resident faculty often contribute to residential programs in college houses. “The success of a residential program almost always has to do with the commitment of the faculty coordinators behind it,” said Classical Studies professor and Associate Dean of Graduate Studies Ralph Rosen, who lives in Riepe College House.

Riepe Faculty Master and College of Arts and Sciences Dean Dennis DeTurck believes residential programs are “really valuable.” Residential programs support CHAS’s mission “to create a community which is aligned to the academic mission of the University,” DeTurck said.

However, he said programs have “accumulated in certain places,” and deteriorated because “they didn’t have buy-in from the faculty.” Programs sometimes “dissipate” because the professors who start them leave.

Delauter also sees the benefit of cutting programs that students don’t gain value from.

In addition to the college house review, CHAS is currently developing a residential program review process that includes comprehensive student surveys, Delauter said, adding that they “hope to have something by the end of the semester.”

Residential programs may be redesigned to include a higher set of expectations for enrolled students, Delauter added.

Currently, the most effective programs require a significant commitment from students. Delauter used the Mentors Program in Riepe — which requires students to teach at a West Philadelphia school at least two hours every week — as an example.

CHAS is collaborating with students on the Residential Advisory Board to develop the review. RAB has recommended a “cyclical review” of programs, which would include informal interviews with enrolled students, Delauter said.

In addition, CHAS, RAB and the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education recently created the possibility of student-designed residential programs. SCUE and RAB will be accepting idea submissions until Nov. 7. One program will be selected to act as a pilot in the high rises next fall.

“Residential programs are a way to take your learning outside the classroom and build a strong intellectual community,” SCUE Chairwoman and College senior Joyce Greenbaum said. “We thought students would be really invested in residential programs if they created them on their own.”

This is good news for students like Wharton sophomore Victoria Sakal, who was not fully satisfied with her residential program — Women in Leadership in Ware College House.

“Overall, it was nothing especially helpful and there was minimal unity within our hall,” Sakal wrote in an email, adding that students “didn’t really do much.”

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.