In December, Northeastern’s faculty senate approved a resolution that will, if higher authorities give the OK, limit students’ abilities to take courses at schools other than Northeastern during the summer.

Why?

The administration is looking to make a Northeastern education more of just what it suggests: an education taught by Northeastern faculty, not other schools’ professors.

Toward the end of discussion, English professor Stuart Peterfreund brought up the ongoing “summer problem” that may create friction between students and the administration if the resolution is implemented.

The problem is the insufficient amount of courses on too few topics available to students during the two summer mini-semesters.

As a result of this issue, students have in the past taken classes at other schools during the summer – and for fewer dollars, which makes leaving the halls of Northeastern in the summer even more appealing.

The faculty senate passed the resolution to limit the number of outside credits to cut down on the number of students who did so.

What was an afterthought should have been the focus of the discussion. If the resolution were implemented, students would have to pay more to take summer courses here than they would if they took courses at other schools.

The choice to limit students’ academic freedom by forcing them to take Northeastern classes during the summer is controversial, because many students say past summer course offerings were unsatisfactory.

If Northeastern wants to improve “tuition capture,” it should make summer courses more appealing and worthwhile for students. Once students get a larger and more diverse selection of courses, they will be more willing to shell out the larger amount of money necessary to take classes here during the summer semesters.

Better course offerings should be a top priority if the university is going to make it more difficult to transfer credits from other institutions. Without question, students would be more willing to pay the big bucks if the course offerings garnered real interest. Student interest and need for upper-level courses should be just as much as a consideration as “tuition capture.”

It could be a sort of win-win situation: wider range of courses, more students. More students, more money. Wouldn’t that suit all sides?

If Northeastern wants to “capture” more money and positive student attention, then perhaps the school could stop spending as many greenbacks in frivolous ways – like purchasing flatscreen TVs for the walls of Stetson West – and start spending it on professors who will teach more summer courses.

If the administration truly wants to capture something, then try capturing the students’ intellectual interest, as well as their dollars.

If students have to be here, then make it worth our educational while.

Isn’t that the goal?