Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Editorial: Give the Core curriculum a much-needed trim

Published: Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Updated: Thursday, October 22, 2009 19:10

It's sat untouched for more than two decades, and Seattle U's Core curriculum is begging for a makeover.


Provost Isiaah Crawford has already been gathering critiques of the program for a year. And Jeff Philpott, Seattle U's director of Core Curriculum, has also pledged his support to the project.

But how ought we rethink the Core?

Remodeling the program will be a twofold endeavor. First, it will require slimming down the Core.

Students enter as freshman eager to dabble in a variety of fields and sample from a smorgasbord of electives.

The Core Curriculum is a 15-course bundle of classes totaling 73 credit hours. While some students can cash in on Advanced Placement credits to get out of a few entry-level classes, many students can spend up to a third of their time parked in Core classes.

Seventy-three required credits is overkill. It leaves some students, like nursing majors, with one elective in four years. Engineering majors have none.

Downsizing the core will allow students to taste new electives and flirt with new ideas.
An equally important project in renewing the program will be approving more courses to count as Core requisite classes. While some students will still choose to take a generic ethics course to check off their basic requirement, others might benefit more from a course that delves into the theoretical underpinnings of ecofeminism.

By refashioning the core into a more flexible program, students won't begrudgingly view their classes as a waste of time or tuition dollars. Professors will also enjoy more freedom to develop courses that align with their personal expertise.

Downsizing the Core and making it more fluid will require ample collaboration between university administrators, students and professors.

Professors teaching interdisciplinary classes could ask their students to pour out their gripes with the Core—and their visions for its future—in a short essay. University officials could draw from these essays to construct a new Core.

Unless the university wants to create leaders for a just and humane world who lack sufficient skills for their professions, the Core needs to be slimmed down and attention turned to major requirements and elective options.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

4 comments

Anonymous
Tue Apr 27 2010 18:26
For those of us that completed 4 years each of English, history, math, and semesters of various courses at the high school level, why do we need to go through them again when we are actually paying for the education? If we did well enough in some of the courses, such as history or English, I'd say trim the core curriculum and trim the time it takes to complete a Bachelor's degree, or require the student to take an internship later in the program. I didn't go to SU, but my uni required over 60 hours of core curriculum while only about half that for the major program, in addition to an extra section of courses required to meet the 120 credit hour requirement for graduation. Plus, not to mention if the university is not having to offer so many basic courses, they could not only focus on majors, research, and funding, but they could process and educate more students without stressing the system. Universities in Europe lean towards a 3-year Bachelor's degree, why can't the US? I'm happy to say that I am currently an unemployed grad student going after a MUCH more useful degree that makes me marketable to loads of employers. Also, I don't have to take core curriculum outside of my area of study.
Anonymous
Fri Feb 26 2010 14:01
The other day I read an article in the Seattle Times written by a man who attended college in China for his undergraduate degree and a college in the U.S. for his graduate degree. He was very impressed by his American education because he felt it caused him to think more creatively. Anyone can memorize numbers or theories, but it is the ability to apply these concepts to real world situations, or come up with our own theories, that a university must teach. I believe that the CORE classes such as Philosophy and Ethics teach us to do this.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 22 2010 12:12
Reducing the core will only downgrade the quality of the degree I feel I received at SU. Students have plenty of other school options if they want the average 'standard' education. Most SU students easily have the option to attend the UW if they so desire - then choose not to. Why is this?
Joe T.
Thu Nov 12 2009 19:26
I don't like the idea of reducing the Core classes. Core classes teach fundamental skills that college graduates need to have if they want to have deep and fulfilling careers post college - logic and reasoning, communication, and ethics, and a good historical grounding. Reducing these areas by reducing classes, in favor of "electives" is not a good idea. The purpose of a college education was to teach a young man or woman a particular field of knowledge that they were interested in - Art, Science, Mathematics, Engineering, Business, etc. To dilute the fundamental classes that serve as a common meeting point for all these disciplines would be foolhardy - a person with a broad but shallow knowledge pool is nearly useless as a contributor to society. Society needs people who can tap the skills of communication, reason, logic, and ethics that a good core curriculum teaches, and at the same time delve deeply into a field of study to create new knowledge, solve problems, or help facilitate the process. If we choose to sacrifice our common learning platform, those separate disciplines run risk of diverging to the point where people will fail to understand where they're coming from.






log out