Core curriculum not the core academic issue at Seattle U

With the Core curriculum under examination for possible revision, Seattle University's administrators need to consider a more fundamental issue concerning required courses: most of them are so easy they bore students to tears.


As Seattle U's reputation continues to grow and the public begins to acknowledge the university as a prominent institution for higher education, so too do its admissions standards continue to become more discerning and rigorous. Obviously, this is a very good thing, but there's a caveat inherent within this growth. Our incoming classes keep getting smarter and smarter, but most Core classes remain banal and academically uninspiring.


In my three and a half years at Seattle U, I can honestly say I have only ever taken three classes that have really challenged me to try and perform to my fullest capacity as a student. That all three of them were electives for my major and taught by the same professor further illustrates the main problem of the academics at Seattle U: Students have to go out of their way and strategize their educational path in order to really feel pushed to a higher standard of academic excellence.


In theory, the idea of the Core is a fantastic one: it speaks to the Jesuit ideal of educating the whole person by requiring all students to have a modicum of knowledge in most subjects that pertain to everyday life. But it seems nowadays it doesn't manage to go far enough. Visualized algebra, astronomy at a university where the observatory is generally non-functional, the histories of Western Civilization at a university that claims to support global education and diversity awareness; it all seems insufficient in relation to the real mission of Seattle U.


If we want to become renowned as the "premier" academic institution in the Pacific Northwest, we need to push our students in ways other prominent academic institutions do. I'm not saying Seattle U needs to morph itself into Harvard, but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to us becoming the Georgetown of the Northwest. We've already got the Jesuit part down, so now let's work on getting our academics up to snuff.


Maybe I'm just biased and speaking from the perspective of a College of Arts and Sciences kid. I really wish I could say I've sweated through my education at Seattle U, but in clean conscience I can't tell that kind of lie. For the most part, my education at Seattle U has been a total breeze. That would be fine if I was breezing through a degree at a subpar state school, but as it stands now, I want a little more intellectual bang for my tuition dollars.


The biggest problem with Seattle U's academics seems to be its student-centric focus. Professors teach to curriculums that seem to cater to lowered student stress levels, and should any faculty member attempt to push their students to a higher academic caliber, the end-of-quarter evaluations every student is required to fill out for every class would bring them retribution from the students who could not meet their standards of excellence.


Seattle U needs to find a way to increase its academic rigor, and it seems to me the best way to accomplish such a task would be to start by changing the perceptions of the youngest students on campus. If freshmen are brought into the system with the understanding that they are really going to have to work for A's in all of their classes—including those in the Core—then maybe Seattle U's curriculum can restructure itself into a holistic and rigorous system that not only educates the whole person, but educates them well.


Maybe those students already in the throes of the current watered-down Core will feel the sting of tougher classes, but perhaps feeling challenged will make them feel less self-righteous and entitled and more empowered to learn as much as they can during their time at Seattle U.