<p>a)which universities don't offer core course requirements?
b)if any of you have gone to a university with core requirements (that are aimed at other subjects away from your major) did u like it? why or why not?</p>
<p>I know that brown let's you take whatever you want</p>
<p>I think Amherst has an open curriculum, too.</p>
<p>You know, a Google search would easily solve this.</p>
<p>LACs = Liberal Arts Colleges</p>
<p>One positive thing about a core is that it can bring you closer with the people in your class, as with the more elaborate (i.e. Great Books) cores, you are taking part in something that every student (and alum) has done, and it can really foster intellectual conversation when you know everyone is on the same ground. (Not to say a core is neccesary for this)</p>
<p>On the other hand, it is a lot of classes that may limit your options in the later years, which is why a lot of schools have (sensibly in my opinion) adopted an area requirement curriculum. So that you can take classes that fulfill different areas on intellectual inquiry, but still can be more geared toward the students interests.</p>
<p>My experiences with core have been great, but part of that is because I go to school with other students who want to do core like I do. If a core does not appeal to you (i.e. sacrificing some free choice in classes for a more formalized approach to education), then you won't be happy with it. But many students find it appealing enough.</p>
<p>There are also different approaches to what many schools call "core." Schools like St. John's College and Thomas More College of the Liberal Arts give students no choice in curriculum, as the curriculum is centered on great books/masterpieces. Columbia and Chicago all have some sort of structure for part of first and second years, with Chicago's "core" slightly more flexible than Columbia's. There are other schools that have similar required seminars, such as Reed's Hum 110.</p>
<p>The way I see it, Brown's "open" curriculum is a bit of a farce. You still have to graduate with a major, meaning that you will have to complete some sort of requirement. Once I finish my core at Chicago in winter of this year, I'll have 2 1/3 years to focus on my major and electives and take only classes that interest me, in which case my education becomes like just like Brown's, except that I only have that free choice for part of my four years instead of the whole thing.</p>
<p>Well, if you'd be interested in LACs, Vassar College has no core curriculum. The only courses required of all students is 1 freshman seminar and 1 quantitative course along with proficiency in a language other than English (you need above a 600 on an SAT subject test, a 4 or 5 on a foreign language/literature AP, or 2 credits worth of study in a foreign language).</p>
<p>Hampshire(or at least it didn't)
Bennington
Earlham (?)
Evergreen State College
Brown
Vassar
Hood Academy</p>
<p>I don't think there are many LACs with a true "core curriculum". A number of LACs, like Swarthmore or Williams, do have "distribution requirements". In such cases, students are required to take a certain minimum number of courses (usually 2 or 3) in different broad fields of study, such as science/math, social sciences, and arts/humanities. But no specific courses are required; any English course, for example, would count towards the arts/humanities requirement. </p>
<p>Most students at LACs have broad interests, and have little or no problem meeting distribution requirements. So most LAC applicants don't perceive distribution requirements as a big deal. However, some applicants are insecure about certain fields of study (often math or lab sciences) and seek the most open possible curriculum in order to avoid them.</p>
<p>It's kind of like the swim test requirement that many LACs have. For most people, a swim test is a non-issue. Yet for some people, it's a deal-breaker.</p>
<p>Colgate's got a pretty solid "CORE" curric.</p>
<p>where can i go w/o the core?</p>
<p>I believe University of Rochester threw out their core curriculum,</p>
<p>Johns Hopkins has distribution requirements instead of a core I think...</p>
<p>Brown...same as the guy up there</p>