Core curriculum in college

[treestarfae]

What do you think about core curriculum in college? I read an old article about this http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/20/us/core-curriculum-vanishing-in-top-colleges-study-says.html?pagewanted=1

[mcconnellboys]

Colleges vary widely, of course, so my recent experience may not be representative of the whole of what's out there right now. In looking at mainly smaller liberal arts colleges for my son as he prepared to apply this past fall, I found that most still have core requirements. That may not be true at all for larger, state universities, however.

 

I believe all required at least one more math and/or science course, even for those coming in with all their requirements. All required at least 2 (and some wanted 3; and I've heard some are moving to 4) foreign language credits (or I presume you would have to make that up upon entrance, as I had to years ago, because my high school did not offer foreign languages). Philosophy was not required when I was in school in the late 70's/early 80's, nor is it required now (or I don't recall seeing it as a requirement for any of the programs).

 

I have wondered about credits required for graduation. When I was in school, we were one of the few who still had a quarter system (which I still prefer, LOL). I'm not sure how semester hours transfer to quarter hours, but we had to have way more hours to graduate than kids seem to need now (and yet they still seem to take at least two years longer to finish, go figure)...... One thing I have learned is that taking longer to graduate isn't always the fault of the student. Some schools don't offer classes that are required/needed in such a way that all students *can* get in what they need and graduate in four years. I only know of one college that guarantees that students will graduate in four years or they'll give you the fifth year free, and that is Centre College in Danville, KY.

 

I don't know about fewer required classes and more open electives. In the programs I've reviewed thus far, the mix seems to be about the same to me as it was when I was in school. But again, that might vary widely by school. I do know that the electives out there today seem to be sometimes wildly weird, inappropriate or downright stupid, LOL. Perhaps not, once you find out the details.....

 

Since this article is 14 years old, perhaps schools have begun to swing back a little toward more conservatism (and I mean that in the very loosest of ways, LOL). Perhaps parents lobbied for more reasonable coursework in return for their hard earned savings being spent on college.... It will be interesting to see what happens now, in light of the new education reforms that are coming down the pike.... I'm not sure if schools are going to net more or less money after it's all said and done.....

[AngieW in Texas]

The core curriculum at the state college I went to is the same as it was when I started there 25 years ago.

[Corraleno]

College "core requirements" are a pet peeve of mine, but not in the way you might think. These are the core requirements for the College of Arts & Sciences at our state university:

 

English: 3 courses (no more than 2 from the same department)

Social/Behavioral Sciences: 4 courses (no more than 2 from the same dept)

Humanities: 3 courses (no more than 2 from the same dept)

Arts: 2 courses (only one of which can be studio)

Foreign Language: 4th level course (must pass a 4th semester-level course)

Almost all of the above courses are prescribed, with students forced to choose from a very limited list.

 

Math: 2 courses

Science: 3 courses, including 1 lab

Math choices include a very basic "Survey of Mathematics" as well as College Algebra and Statistics for Social Science, and science courses include a variety of "lite" science-for-humanities-majors courses which require minimal math.

 

Notice the disparity??? :mad:

 

The humanities/social science students only have to take 5 courses in the math/science area, while the math/science kids have to take a minimum of 13 non-math/science courses. Plus there are many "softened" math & science courses for humanities students ~ but no "soft" courses in English/Humanities/Social Science for the math/science kids. A Chemistry major, for example, is stuck choosing four courses from Political Science, Economics, Anthropology, Sociology & Psychology, plus 3 courses in History/Literature/Philosophy, plus 3 English courses, plus 2 art courses, one of which must be Art History. And while a Social Science major can count Introduction to Environmental Science, Geography, and Physical Anthropology as their science credits, a Geology major cannot count Archaeology or Geography (except Human Geography) as their social science credits.

 

Furthermore, non-science majors do not have to take any courses outside their major other than the core requirements, whereas most science majors have to take a number of additional courses outside their major. For example, a Geology major needs to take all of the core requirements (above) plus additional math and science courses, plus all the required Geology courses.

 

It's really hard for science majors to graduate in 4 years when they have so many other courses to get out of the way first. Unless the student is able to cover a good chunk of the core requirements and major requirements via dual enrollment or AP/CLEP credits, they will have a hard time completing their BS in 4 years ~ or will do so with only the bare minimum of majors courses. I don't object to the idea of a core curriculum, but I really think the core courses should be more evenly distributed ~ maybe 2 courses in most areas and 1 in Art.

 

End of rant :rant:

Jackie

[Liza Q]

I believe all required at least one more math and/or science course, even for those coming in with all their requirements. All required at least 2 (and some wanted 3; and I've heard some are moving to 4) foreign language credits (or I presume you would have to make that up upon entrance, as I had to years ago, because my high school did not offer foreign languages). Philosophy was not required when I was in school in the late 70's/early 80's, nor is it required now (or I don't recall seeing it as a requirement for any of the programs).

 

 

The core curriculum at my daughter's college has no foreign language but three philosophy classes! The rest of the core is pretty standard - light on math/science, heavy on humanities. Out of 42 core credits, only 6 are math/science!

 

Like Jackie said, it is unbalanced. However, the two majors my daughter is considering (Education and Psychology) do actually require more math/science than the core classes alone. But the balance is still way in favor of the humanities/social sciences in her non-major related classes.

[Chris in VA]

Ds has to take a core curriculum, too--I don't mind the heavy emphasis on things other than math or science, because, to me, it takes a lot of time to cover the material in the humanities. I want him to connect with the ideas of the ages, so to speak, and I want him to know a lot about literature and history and philosophy, and that sort of subject. Sciences are very important, and so is math, but I don't think they are as broad--well, let me rephrase that--it takes a long time to get enough math and science under your belt to see where the connections to the "real world" are. I don't think there's time in undergrad to do that, if it isn't your area of speciality. OTOH, it takes a while to read beyond the basics in the humanities, also--but that sort of knowledge seems more, IDK, applicable? to the human condition and "life."

 

I'm not being very clear--excuse me for not expressing this well.

 

It could be, of course, that my own lack of really wonderful math and science courses lead me to this conclusion. I would have dearly loved to have learned how to use science as a lens to see the world, rather than ONLY learning how to use literature/religion/philosophy.

 

Thinking out loud some, here--

 

Geez, maybe you are right! lol

[emubird]

That balance of core curriculum courses looks fairly standard to me -- and the science and math professors always gripe about it.

 

The science professors have a valid point too: as much of today's public policy decisions need to be made on the basis of a solid understanding of science, it's very important that all college graduates understand science. They are our future voters. A couple courses in somewhat fluffy science classes isn't enough.

[Jane in NC]

As with most things, there has been a swing of the pendulum through the years.

 

When I attended undergrad, requirements were broad. X number of credits in humanities, social sciences and math/science. I was one of the those kids who despised social science--met my minimum then washed my hands of the whole business.

 

When I was an adviser while on staff at one of NC's public universities, I was appalled by the petty requirements. For example, students had to take either one religion or philosophy course from a small list of courses (not just any religion or philosophy course). Some of those courses only had one section. Students with practicums or student teaching had to plan carefully to avoid another semester at the university. Even careful planning did not always work when sections filled or conflicted with courses required for the major.

 

The change that I see in modern college requirements is the emphasis on writing for freshmen. When I attended school, it seemed that all entering freshmen took a basic composition course of some sort. (Maybe some had placed out of this--I don't know.) Today it seems that many of the selective schools or honors programs at state colleges have freshmen seminars that are writing intensive. Essentially these are topic driven sections that focus on something possibly esoteric with the ultimate purpose of working on writing skills. Is this a new thing?

[treestarfae]

:bigear:

[MomsintheGarden]

I agree with you, Jackie. I think this is where homeschoolers can have a distinct advantage. If you realize early in your student's high school career that he/she will be a science or engineering major, you can plan ahead for CLEPs and APs.

 

We hardly did this for ds, only realizing in the middle of his senior high school year that he could do several of each. He ended up getting about one semester's worth of credit. He's taking an overload to be able to graduate in four years with a math/computer science (in the engineering dept) major.

 

For dd, who is younger than him by 2 years, we were able to squeeze in more college credits in her homeschool high school. She will enter college with 59 credits if she passes her APs next month, having already taken CLEPs, APs, and some of her particular college's specific distance-learning classes. She would have done more but she was required to enter as a sophomore or below to qualify for her scholarship. Taking these tests was cheaper for us than paying CC tuition and fees. She is excited because she will either be able to graduate early or have plenty of room for another major, a minor, and/or study abroad, or even time to just breathe.

 

Not every student is ready for college work in high school. For those who are, it can be a boon. If you do this, you must be careful to have your student study for applicable credit toward his major. Also check on the maximum credit allowed by the college.

 

HTH,

GardenMom

[Corraleno]

OTOH, it takes a while to read beyond the basics in the humanities, also--but that sort of knowledge seems more, IDK, applicable? to the human condition and "life."

I think this is an attitude many people share, and is in fact the reasoning behind the very humanities-heavy core curricula at most colleges and universities. I think it's an unintentionally biased view, though, and I think you hit the nail on the head with this statement:

 

It could be, of course, that my own lack of really wonderful math and science courses lead me to this conclusion. I would have dearly loved to have learned how to use science as a lens to see the world, rather than ONLY learning how to use literature/religion/philosophy.

This is definitely true for me. Ironically, when I was younger I thought I hated math and science ~ thanks to the abysmal math and science teaching in my HS ~ and I was thrilled not to have to take math and science courses in college.

 

However, long after I left college (and grad school), I started realizing how much I had missed and how little I actually understood of the physical (and natural) world around me. Now virtually all of my reading is non-fiction, and much of it is science-oriented. Our homeschool is moving in an increasingly "sciencey" direction, partly because I have a son who was born a scientist (as well as a DH who's a scientist) and partly due to my own growing interest in the area. And that has really changed my perspective on what's "relevant" and what kind of information really should constitute a "core curriculum" for college students.

 

For example, why is it imperative that a Biology major be able to analyze the plot of a Russian novel and recite important names and dates in the history of Western art, but it's perfectly OK that a Literature major doesn't know where her pancreas is or how a computer works? Isn't understanding how our bodies and our machines and the physical world around us actually function at least as relevant as studying the angst & musings of dead guys?

 

Jackie

 

[ETA: The above isn't aimed at you, Chris, I'm just throwing this out there for discussion... ]

Edited April 3, 2010 by Corraleno

[Liza Q]

For example, why is it imperative that a Biology major be able to analyze the plot of a Russian novel and recite important names and dates in the history of Western art, but it's perfectly OK that a Literature major doesn't know where her pancreas is or how a computer works? Isn't understanding how our bodies and our machines and the physical world around us actually function at least as relevant as studying the angst & musings of dead guys?

 

 

Oh, this made me laugh - but I think that you are right.