The Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (UCC), in a closed meeting last Thursday, voted to send a proposal to the faculty that would alter the current pass/fail system at Brandeis, eliminating students' ability to take a class pass/fail without the professor's knowledge.Union President Josh Brandfon '05 said that until mid-February the Union was under the impression that all talks of altering pass/fail were a product of technological barriers. He said that the student representatives on the UCC were reporting that PeopleSoft software could not support the current pass/fail system.

PeopleSoft, which will replace MAAX and WebReg, is not compatible with the current pass/fail system because, in its original form, it cannot support the uncovering of grades after the semester if a student chooses to take a course pass/fail.

The Union, student members of the UCC and UCC Chair and Dean of Arts and Sciences Adam Jaffe agree that discussions to alter the pass/fail system during the last few months were necessary, but there is dispute and confusion over whether these talks were initiated for technological or philosophical reasons.

Brandfon said the view of the UCC representatives at the time was, "We can't keep the current pass/fail system the way it is, so let's find the best way to change it."

That notion was corrected four weeks ago when, in a lunch with many high-level administrators including Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Peter French, Union executive board members learned that there was, in fact, a way to write a modification to the PeopleSoft program that would allow students to uncover grades. The Union also learned that that this was known to the Administration since November.

According to Chief Information Officer Perry Hanson, who would oversee any software modification to PeopleSoft, creating a "module" that would allow the uncovering of grades is both expensive and time consuming, but is possible. It also must be updated and virtually rewritten every time PeopleSoft releases an upgrade.

University President Jehuda Reinharz said that he does not think that technology should be used as an excuse to change the current system.

"I don't believe that it was a technological issue," he said. "If it's a technological issue then it's the duty of the people who run technology to solve. I mean, we should not decide academic issues on the basis of technology. It's just absurd."

Reinharz said that he was unaware that there was a technological problem at all: "This is the first I hear of it," he said. "I mean, I don't believe it's a technical problem; I think it's an academic problem-an academic issue. And I think it should be debated, and I have not heard the debate in person."

The only alternative to a software modification would require the registrar to manually override each person who wanted to uncover their grade.

Until this fall, when the University decided to begin the process of changing the registration software to PeopleSoft, pass/fail was not on the agenda of the UCC, according to Jaffe. Discussions began, however, to address such issues as the uncovering of grades.

Surprised that customization of the PeopleSoft program was possible, and that

Hanson said he informed the UCC of this last semester, Union officers asked the student members of the UCC to report on the status of these pass/fail discussions.

At the Feb. 22 Senate meeting, following the lunch with French and his staff, UCC representatives Brett Freidman '04, Alan Tannenwald '05 and Rebecca Hanus '06 informed the Union Senate that the closed UCC discussions had moved from technological in nature to philosophical.

Union representatives expressed frustration over the fact that they were not made aware that a technological solution was available, and that it seemed students on the UCC still thought they were still having a technologically driven discussion.

Jaffe said that since the beginning of discussions, he believes every member of the UCC knew that while PeopleSoft opened the discussion on pass/fail, it was not the driving force behind the last few months of talks.

"The registrar told me last fall that that the way we do pass/fail would be 'awkward' in PeopleSoft, but not impossible," Jaffe said. "Though discussions began with PeopleSoft, we said, 'let's put PeopleSoft aside, we haven't looked at pass/fail in many years. We should now decide on what is the best pass/fail system that we think we can possibly have, and then return to the question of whether there are problems with doing that in PeopleSoft.'"

Jaffe also said that, as a result, the UCC's focus has not been on finding a way to make PeopleSoft work with the current pass/fail system, because the UCC isn't necessarily sure it wants to keep the current system.

The student representatives on the UCC reported to the Senate last Sunday that they were not aware since the beginning of discussions that all talks were entirely philosophical.

"As far as when it became a technological issue and when it became a philosophical issue, that is debatable," students on the UCC said. "There might have been feelings one way or another when it was philosophical in the minds of the faculty and when it was technological. If it started as philosophical, all initial proposals were still technological. We were working toward developing a technological solution regardless of the philosophy surrounding the issue."

The representatives reported that the first time they learned that the pass/fail discussions were entirely philosophical was during the lunch with French and the Union.

"We were still operating under the assumption that technology was still the driving force behind the philosophical discussion," the UCC representatives said in a statement to the Senate.

After months of debate and discussion, the UCC produced a two-part proposal on Thursday. The first section recommends that anonymity be removed from the current system. This would mean that instructors would know who was taking their class pass/fail.

Various Union officers fear that this would compel professors to grade pass/fail students' work less judiciously, since grades would not matter as much.

Jaffe and faculty serving on the UCC said these claims were unfounded, and that they would grade all students the same whether they were taking a course pass/fail or for a grade.

"The ability of teachers to know which students are taking their course pass/fail works to the benefit of the students," UCC member Prof. Thomas Doherty (AMST) said. "It allows teachers to push students and encourage them to do better. It provides teachers with information that directly concerns students' performance in class. It allows teachers to approach students who are taking pass/fail and doing well and say, 'Why are you taking this course pass/fail when you could be getting an A?'"

The second part of the UCC's recommendation to the faculty would eliminate the requirement that students must be enrolled in four or more courses in order to take on of them pass/fail.

Jaffe came before the Senate last Sunday to explain and defend these recommendations. He met opposition to any change the current system from almost every Senator in the room.

One of the main concerns voiced by Student Union officers at was that the Administration cannot guarantee the students that they will not be treated differently once the teacher is aware of a student taking the class pass/fail.

Senator for the Class of 2004 Gabe Reif said that though he sees much validity in Dean Jaffe's arguments, "my problem is that he is leaving too much to professors, saying professors will reach out to all pass/fail students. I don't trust faculty to treat each pass/fail student fairly 100 percent of time."

"There is no assurance that anonymity will grant us any type of benefits," North Quad Senator Aaron Gaynor '07 said. "Dean Jaffe promised that if we ended anonymity, professors could approach pass/fail students more easily. I really think it will create a bias. While most professors will fulfill their duties, others might take advantage of the fact that a student is taking pass/fail, and not spend as much time evaluating their work."

According to minutes taken at the Senate meeting, Jaffe responded to this by saying, "I admit, I can't sit here and tell you that will never happen, but the balance is that more will gain from this change."

At the end of the meeting, the Senate unanimously passed a resolution addressing this issue. The document conveyed to the UCC and faculty the students' desire for the current pass/fail system to remain in place.

A statement issued by the Union shortly after the resolution was passed read: "...[the] Senate voted unanimously on Sunday in favor of a resolution to reaffirm students' commitment to maintaining the current pass/fail system at the University."

The resolution says that "the pass/fail system has become a unique and powerful part of the Brandeis tradition, a testament to the Brandeis spirit of innovative and interdisciplinary learning, and a commitment to the unsurpassed access to faculty that Brandeis promises to all undergraduates."

In addition to encouraging the faculty to take into consideration the voice of the students, it also asks that they create an open forum in which students would have the opportunity to voice their opinions before any decisions are made.