<p>Hi all! I usually post on the Brown forum, but this is a bit of a broader issue so I thought I would post here. Basically, I run a small non-profit that advocates for "curricular freedom" -- our word for aspects of a college curriculum that provide freedom in course choice. I just developed a list of colleges with open curricula for our website, but I want to make sure I'm not forgetting any or getting details wrong about the ones that are there.</p>
<p>We've excluded some of the schools that frequently get described as "open curriculum" schools -- such as Eugene Lang, Rochester, Vassar, Wesleyan, etc. -- because they don't meet our definition of an open curriculum, which is: Colleges and universities whose main liberal arts program includes no core courses, no general education or distribution requirements, and a maximum of four competency or seminar requirements (such as a writing requirement or first-year seminar). Colleges with distribution "suggestions" required for graduation with honors have been excluded.</p>
<p>So, what I'm asking from you is if you know of any school that I've left off the list (for example, a less-well-known school whose name doesn't come up very often), or if you go to one of the schools on the list and think that we're incorrectly describing the curriculum, please respond in this thread. Thanks so much!</p>
<p>Out of 124 credits needed for graduation, no more than 48 can be in one department, nor more than 92 can be in one division (humanities, social studies, or science). This effectively imposes breadth requirements. It is, however, possible for a Grinnell student to completely avoid one of the divisions.</p>
<p>Thanks so much – this is exactly the type of input I was hoping for. The Grinnell info was hard to parse, and I totally missed that aspect of the curriculum. Pending further thought on this type of requirement, I’m removing Grinnell from the list; you’re right that it essentially acts as a distribution requirement. Thanks again!</p>
<p>I have to say, “open curriculum” is used as a buzz word so much that it can be mighty hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.</p>
<p>You probably want to have a list of frequently asked about schools that do not make your list and why, because people will probably ask “why isn’t Grinnell/etc. on your list?”.</p>
<p>Thanks for the suggestion. Eventually, we’re probably going to be surveying a large number of schools and presenting the results in tiers of free-ness, so that would accomplish what you’re suggesting. At the moment, though, we’re just trying to get the actual “open curriculum” schools down. What would you think about something like “some schools that commonly described as having an ‘open curriculum’ but do not fit this definition include X, Y, and Z” ?</p>
<p>Also, what other schools do you think people expect to see? I can think of Eugene Lang, Grinnell, Rochester, Vassar, Wesleyan. Maybe Hampshire, too.</p>
<p>In general, where certain programs of study (such as pre-med or engineering) have requirements imposed from the outside, the school will not be excluded if its general liberal arts curriculum does not have such requirements. When we do our full assessment, we’ll probably take a look at issues like Brown’s ABET requirements.</p>
<p>I had forgotten about Sarah Lawrence, which I looked into a while back. I think I had decided it did not count for that reason.</p>
<p>Evergreen State has a very different system from a typical school, but from what I can tell it satisfies our definition (and also strikes me as very cool). I’ll write up a description and include it.</p>
<p>We also might be doing a similar list about grade reform. If you have a list of schools with grade reform (i.e., something more than “you can take a few classes pass/fail”), please let me know.</p>
<p>Edit: Also, you have my thanks for all of this great info. You clearly know a lot about this stuff.</p>
<p>Unusual grading systems would be a separate matter, not necessarily connected to open curriculum versus breadth requirements versus large core curriculum.</p>
OP, as a parent who is paying the tuition bill, I’d be interested in hearing the argument in favor of this type of college experience (I can think of lots against) and in learning why you think this is an important enough issue to deserve an advocacy movement.</p>
<p>@reeinaz: Thanks! I had seen that one, and at some point will work through the whole list.</p>
<p>@ucbalumnus: The idea would be to have a separate list. They’re related in that they both can be mechanisms for increasing exploration, etc.</p>
<p>@MommaJ: I’m not in a position to get into too deep a discussion of it, as I am sitting for the bar exam starting Tuesday. (Working on this stuff was my way of putting my mind to something else for part of today – the bar is weird in that you spend months studying for it, so you actually can afford to relax and get yourself into a good place.)</p>
<p>We believe that, for the right student, the experience of crafting an educational experience for oneself is valuable far beyond what distribution requirements or core curricula provide. We have our highlight arguments in favor here: [Curricular</a> Freedom: Why Freedom?](<a href=“http://openjar.org/curricular-freedom-why-freedom]Curricular”>http://openjar.org/curricular-freedom-why-freedom) A lot of the arguments assume a liberal arts rather than pre-professional idea of the purpose of college. I’m not sure we’re on the same side of that argument – especially given the paying the tuition bill issue – but it’s a separate argument that many have had on these forums, I’m sure. </p>
<p>The reason to have an advocacy organization is, in part, to try to persuade people like yourself that your gut reaction about open curricula might not be right. There are very strong organizations on the other side of this, such as the unhelpfully named American Council of Trustees and Alumni, a conservative organization that advocates for strong core curricula. We’re just trying to balance the scale a little bit.</p>
<p>Some students may benefit from the increased curricular freedom to explore more areas without worrying about checking the boxes. But it is likely that many more would just avoid anything too far outside their majors. This is especially true when it comes to humanities and social studies majors avoiding science courses, or taking the special easy ones at schools where science courses are required for breadth requirements.</p>
<p>Of course, some organizations do not just advocate for core curricula; they advocate for specific core curricula that others who may favor that (or colleges that do have that) may not agree with.</p>
<p>^Very true about organizations advocating specifically for their vision of a core curriculum. ACTA, for example, gives Columbia a grade of C in their ratings, despite what Columbia would consider a very full-featured core curriculum.</p>
<p>However, note that most college students these days attend college for pre-professional reasons, even if they do not choose an obviously pre-professional major, as it is generally believed that a person with a bachelor’s degree (even one without particularly good job and career prospects like biology) has a better chance in the job market than one with just a high school diploma (however, other forms of post-secondary education may be more competitive). Few would care to spend the time and money to attend college if there were not at least a perceived career value in doing so.</p>
<p>This is likely even more true at the less selective colleges where obviously pre-professional majors dominate the major choices.</p>
<p>You might want an A list and a B list. The A list can have your definition of totally open as you like it. The B list could include those most associate with open curricula, but not meeting your standards. You could explain your difference between the two lists, but having both would definitely make it more useful for the general population as not all of us define open as strictly as you do and could prefer the B list.</p>
<p>I’m confused. If science courses are required for breadth requirements, then it isn’t an open curriculum. That said, those ‘special easy’ classes do have value. My H teaches a “special easy” class that fulfills a social science distribution requrement, and he gets a lot of kids who go on to take more advanced courses because they enjoyed the ‘baby’ class. </p>
<p>I’d be interested in knowing why you think “many more would just avoid anything too far outside their majors.” Generally speaking, schools with open curricula attract kids who want to explore widely, and the advising system is set up to promote this. I’m mostly familiar with Brown, and I’ve never seen anything to indicate Brown grads don’t come out just as ‘well rounded’ as schools that have core requirements. </p>
<p>Personally, I think there’s lot to be said for being in a class with kids who chose that class as opposed to being in a class that kids are taking because they have to.</p>