Dickinson College’s faculty members voted against the elimination of the PE requirement on Tuesday, March 6 at the faculty meeting.

“It [the vote] went against the proposal…[the PE requirement] will not be eliminated,” said Neil Diamant, professor of Asian law and society.

According to Susan Perabo, professor of creative writing and member of the All-College Committee on Academic Program and Standards (APSC), the committee brought the vote to the faculty meeting because it felt the requirement was dysfunctional.

“I think we wanted to raise the fact that it is not working as it’s currently configured, which is something that the students are well aware of…. I think that there is a commitment among the faculty to fix it [and] I do think that most of the faculty understands that….there’ll have to be some significant changes.”

According to Chris Jones ’19, president of Student Senate, Student Senate distributed a survey regarding the requirement in November 2015, which “garnered approximately 1000 responses and provided the basis for the comprehensive review of the requirement, as well as recommendations to the All-College Committee on Academic Programs and Standards.” A Senate working group then compiled the results and “In March of 2017, Student Senate submitted a formal document consisting of a review and recommendations to APSC.”

APSC then examined the data and found that the current graduation requirement of four half-semester PE blocks is “highly inconsistent across the activities that fulfill the PE credit,” according to the agenda of Tuesday’s faculty meeting. These inconsistencies include what counts for a single PE block as well as the assessment and evaluation mechanisms that are in place for these courses. The committee also cited concerns regarding the fact that coaches, who are not usually hired to be PE instructors, are often the ones teaching these courses.

Regarding the future of the requirement, Perabo added, “I anticipate that there will be significant changes, what exactly they will be of course I can’t say.” She also stated that as long as physical education courses remain part of the graduation requirement, “[APSC] will continue to discuss it… We will try to fix the broken system.”

Provost and Dean of the College Neil Weissman also expressed support for alternate proposals.

“I think we need to rethink where we are and consider alternate proposals to accomplish the goals that the faculty articulated. For the time being, we stay with the current requirement.”

Vice President for Enrollment Management Stefanie Niles expressed disappointment with the outcome of the vote.

“While there were many important points raised, as I think specifically about the responsibilities of coaches and the jobs we hire them to do, eliminating the PE requirement would have enabled them to focus more of their time on coaching and mentoring their student-athletes, which has certainly contributed to the high retention rate of this population of students.”

She also explained that the elimination of the requirement also would have allowed coaches to better fulfill their role of recruiting athletes.

“Our coaches are committed, dedicated professionals who care deeply about working with students, and who are balancing many responsibilities – as coaches and, in a number of cases as administrators – in a situation where the athletic department is understaffed relative to our peers (many of which do not have a PE requirement, or have one less rigorous than ours).”

Professor of Biology Michael Roberts, however, stated, “I spoke and voted against the resolution to eliminate the physical education requirement because I believe it is in the best interest of Dickinson students to be educated in physical fitness, so each student can make an informed decision about how they will incorporate that knowledge into their life.”

While he stated that he understood that the current system had errors, he thought this meant “that the quality of instruction and the determination of what counts as a PE block needs to be re-examined. I want the requirement to achieve its intended goals and argued that “fixing” the requirement is preferable to eliminating it.”

Several students, however, expressed disappointment with the faculty’s decision to keep the PE requirement.

Mary Hinton ’19 posted in the Dickinson College Class of 2019 Facebook page to encourage her fellow classmates to discuss the issue with faculty.

“I encourage you all to speak with your professors, as they were the ones who voted to keep the PE credit. Please talk to them and voice your opinions as to why the PE credit does not enhance, and often hinders, your education and Dickinson experience,” she wrote. “In an ideal world, Dickinson would be able to create a great physical education curriculum, however, this is not currently feasible for the college, nor is it something most students want to be where the college is investing money and resources.”

Maya Harvey ’20 also expressed frustration about the vote expressing that the Dickinson mandated physical education courses are often less efficient than her personal workouts are.

“As someone who goes to the gym on my own [four] days a week and plays a club sport, the requirement is [kind of] frivolous and impedes on my academic schedule. Having a one hour block in the middle of my classes to work out is much less efficient than getting all my work completed and working out in my own time,” she stated. “Hopefully they can come up with a much more beneficial solution.”

Others, however, felt less affected by the vote.

“Speaking as a student athlete [the vote] doesn’t really affect me on a personal level but on a theoretical level I still feel that requiring physical education on the college level is unnecessary,” maintained Adam Gamber ’20, a Track & Field athlete.

Zeshi Wang ’20 explained that while he personally did not feel very affected by the vote, he wanted to see an improvement in the quality of courses offered.

“In my opinion, it doesn’t matter because one PE course is only half a semester [in most cases] and the college does offer a variety of courses from traditional sports such as soccer to Appalachian hiking and scuba diving,” he stated. “I do think that the quality of the course[s] should be improved because I expect to learn different sports in class instead of just letting us do whatever we want in class, which turns out to be a waste of time.”

Eryn Darcy ’19, however, expressed support for the requirement.

“Honestly, I support the PE credit. I think that the way varsity sports are counted is unfair, as many don’t receive credit for their off season even though they still do a considerable amount of training that should warrant credit. Otherwise, I think it’s quite easily attainable.”