<p>^^^ I agree, and I think that true engagement with sciences and languages and philosophy is truly essential, in work and in life. But so many core courses are third rate, filled with people who don’t care…etc. And many people will be more deeply engaged through their own passions than through a specified course program. One more reason why ‘fit’ is everything in a college.</p>
<p>It seems if you like the idea of a liberal arts education then you would like the Gen Ed requirements. I have experienced the pain of making it through requirements (in my case engineering) outside of my major (management/finance) but looking back those courses gave me the background to be successful in my career. And I think making engineers take a writing course is a great idea! :)</p>
<p>^ I agree. What i just called on another thread occupation myopia. I think it doesn’t serve anyone to go for just vocational training (especially at college education prices!). Although many students supposedly want to learn only things that they can see related to their future occupation (as they know it, at 18 or 19), most don’t realize the connections that exist between disparate areas of knowledge, and how training in one field shapes thinking in another, how it will develop their brain and enable them to be more creative in thought and more flexible in their career paths. Add in the fact that most actually can not appreciate what their REAL job will entail, and that most won’t be doing the occupation they think they are training for, and likely will end up in many different careers taking on many different roles…and well this is why I think paying college prices for what amounts to more narrow education is not a good idea.</p>
<p>If you look at the requirements for a BS or a BFA it’s close to what some posters here are advocating–straight into the professional preparation. I think that could be perfectly fine for other types of vocational training–as long as you don’t get to call your degree a BA.</p>
<p>I think a limited general education requirement is ideal. One class in each major subject area, as well as an extra writing class or two, takes barely a year to complete (especially if courses can be tested out of) and yet still exposes students to many subjects. At Stanford, for example, all students are required to take one of each of the following:</p>
<p>Engineering and Applied Sciences
Mathematics
Humanities
Social Science
Natural Science</p>
<p>in addition to at least one year of a language (fairly easily tested out of), some writing classes, and a humanities core that I’m certainly not suggesting. Students can usually take 10 classes every year - at some schools more, and at others fewer. With that in mind, I’d recommend an eight to ten class requirement - one in each of the five subject areas above, plus a writing class and a year (two courses) of some language, linguistic, or cultural course. That’s only nine classes, and no one is going to die with one humanities or one math class.</p>
<p>Our gen eds are three times all that, and though there is some benefit to the classes it is a pretty sad state of affairs that my major can be fit into one semester, though it’s more likely it will take two unless some courses are picked strategically (which I managed by accident). It’s almost as if I am going to school for general studies and throwing in poli sci as an afterthought.</p>
<p>Gen ed makes the first two years of college look like high school. Why should some students have to wait that long to explore their majors? Why, also, do some of these requirements seem like they should be revisited conceptually. It’s time to reimagine the core completely. Because anyone who has experienced Pilates knows, the strength of the core is essential.</p>
<p>REALLY enjoying the different thoughts. It has also made me realize I need to lighten up on my S who is pursuing a social-sciences-type degree. It’s had me worried about his future employment prospects. I keep pushing him towards a “practical” minor that I think will provide income. He keeps talking about all the wonderful possibilities he’ll have and all the options open to him because he is exposed to all sorts of things.</p>
<p>Love what momofboys said in post #20…I think she may be onto something! or at least I hope so, for S sake 
</p>
<p>I also agree that sometimes the exposure is what might be necessary to find your passion - I have a friend who started out a business major and switched majors 3-years in. We all thought he was crazy, but he ended up with a PhD in a completely obscure field and has had the coolest, most well paying jobs of us all!</p>
<p>But, then again…I like the idea (as in post #25) that we limit that exposure so it’s not so rough getting through those first couple years. Or maybe I agree with twisted in post #16 - it helps weed out some students…guess I’m still on the fence here. ;-)</p>
<p>I like applicannot’s idea, at least as a possibility. I also think there should be a number of choices for these courses, so the science can be botany or astronomy, for instance, not just a survey course. I think there’s great merit to a place like St. Johns, where everyone takes a similar in-depth curriculum…for some people. But as we’ve come to know, people simply are NOT ‘well-rounded’-- they have strengths and weaknesses and they should be able to dive into those areas of strength. </p>
<p>I went to a school with no core requirements, ended up taking calculus along with an English major, and really enjoyed it. D will likely go for a BFA. As a democratic nation we need our kids (our future voters!) to be really well-educated. But by the age of 18 a lot of people are really anxious to get started on their lives with a serious course of study in one particular area-- and they should be able to do that.</p>
<p>I’m sort of the odd duck out, I went to an LAC, but my LAC had no core requirements, only required that you take one writing intensive class your first year (and they offer those in every department including sciences) and take 50% of your total courses outside of your major. In a way, this was really great. You weren’t forced to take general ed requirements, but you were forced to take things that were not just in your department. And you had a lot of freedom. If you were interested in Geology or Astronomy, but majoring in English, you could take just geology or astronomy and you didn’t have to take biology just because it was designated as Freshman Science 101. </p>
<p>Also, I found that departments competed more for students by offering really interesting low-level courses specifically designed for non-majors. They knew that there were a lot of students out there who could be enticed to join their major if given the right introduction so they really made an effor to make sure that you first introduction to their subject, for those not committed to the major, would be fascinating. After all, the more students they could reel in, the better for their department.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed, although Connecticut’s is even more broad. No doubt because it’s not centrally focused on the sciences/engineering like Stanford is. </p>
<p>Distribution requirements make sense. But Mandatory Gen-Eds are annoying. I like this much better:</p>
<p>Area 1 - Physical and Biological Sciences
Area 2 - Mathematics and Formal Reasoning
Area 3 - Social Sciences
Area 4 - Critical Studies in Literature and the Arts
Area 5 - Creative Arts
Area 6 - Philosophical and Religious Studies
Area 7 - Historical Studies</p>
<p>Foreign Language Requirement: Each student must include a course in a foreign language at the intermediate level or higher; as an option, students may choose a new language, in which case they must complete a two semester sequence of the same elementary language.</p>
<p>Writing Across the Curriculum: Each student is required to take two courses that are designated as Writing Intensive or Writing Enhanced, at least one of which must be Writing Intensive.</p>
<p>Those requirements are so broad (Especially the WAC one, because you’re bound to take something writing intensive in one of the other classes) that an Environmental Science class can count as a Historical Studies class. I don’t want to paint for my Arts requirement? Cool. I’ll learn how to make a documentary or take a creative writing class or a dance class or theater. I really suck at Math, and don’t want calc? Done- I’ll take logic, or Culture of Math or Math of Money, which is at least practical. Don’t want to take chemistry? That’s great- I can take botony, or astronomy or any number of bio or physics classes (which I wouldn’t do, because physics is math.)</p>
<p>But if I hated milton and shakespeare? Fine. I’d take a film class or music or heck, that one class that reads Harry Potter and other fantasy/sci-fi novels.</p>
<p>Gen-eds for a degree very much was a part of my search process.</p>
<p>Probably the determining reason that I didn’t apply to UChicago–despite being very attracted to its “personality”–was the Core. I don’t mind flexible distribution requirements, and requiring one lab course (which I wouldn’t otherwise take) is a minor annoyance; but required core classes are extremely limiting for students with varied interests and/or wanting to double-major. Chicago’s Core is known for being one of the “best,” but the students openly acknowledge the impossibility of pursuing two unrelated majors and graduating in four years without summer classes or overloading. (I’ve done the calculations for several schools, adding up required core courses plus prospective majors/minors, and the result was sometimes very discouraging.)</p>
<p>Also, I made a new thread based on Gwen Fairfax’s wish upthread: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/878187-schools-flexible-but-not-nonexistent-core-requirements.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/878187-schools-flexible-but-not-nonexistent-core-requirements.html</a></p>
<p>thank you Keilexandra!</p>
<p>I applied to UChi, but you were more sensible about it Keil. Heh. If I had gone, it probably would’ve been awful, because I <em>would</em> overload. </p>
<p>And end up majoring in Near Eastern Studies with a focus in the Cuneiform languages/English or something. Too many language choices, and my poor head might explode. </p>
<p>…bet you I would’ve gotten in if I professed a love for Akkadian, though.</p>
<p>Gotta admit, the ability to double major (sanely) was on my list of things I should be able to do.</p>
<p>“'m sort of the odd duck out, I went to an LAC, but my LAC had no core requirements, only required that you take one writing intensive class your first year (and they offer those in every department including sciences) and take 50% of your total courses outside of your major. In a way, this was really great. You weren’t forced to take general ed requirements, but you were forced to take things that were not just in your department. And you had a lot of freedom. If you were interested in Geology or Astronomy, but majoring in English, you could take just geology or astronomy and you didn’t have to take biology just because it was designated as Freshman Science 101.”</p>
<p>That sounds amazing to me, I would have loved that. I probably still would have taken a fairly wide variety of courses, but at the very least I could take what interested me instead of going whole semesters without a single class I like.</p>
<p>Yurtle, while I see your point, I feel like that’s a lot of requirements - and some of them aren’t, at least on the surface, particularly broad. I was going for an efficient yet broad system.</p>
<p>Distribution requirements, aka “flexible” core, themselves appear to fall into two main categories: the 3-4 criteria version and the 7-10 criteria version. Both usually add up to about 9 courses, but the difference can be significant for an individual student with specific interests and anti-interests.</p>
<p>Liberal Arts and core and/or distribution requirements do not necessarily go hand in hand. I went to a LAC with no requirements (other than completing a major and getting enough units) and I felt free to take different courses in many different areas. It meant a lot to me that I took what I did because I wanted to learn it rather than to check off a box on a list. From what I’ve seen of distribution requirements (D’s school) they are one size fits all and often don’t make that much sense for an individual student. My favorite schools are liberal arts schools that let you choose your program. There are quite a few of those and many of them are quite well regarded.</p>
<p>I liked what I had before Harvard decided 7-10 was better than 3-4. The world was divided into Natural Sciences, Social Science and Humanities. If you took the special gen ed courses you took two semesters worth of each branch, if you took departmental courses you had to take twice as many. I mixed and matched. For Nat Sci I took both a gen ed type Intro to Computer course and a departmental Intro to Physics. Many of the gen ed courses were great, a few were rotten. Ditto for the departmental courses. I ended up taking more Nat Sci courses than the minimum, and only the minimum of Soc Sci courses and lots of humanities courses outside my major which also counted as a humanity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I guess? They have 5, and Conn has 7 not including either of their languages… The writing heavy classes are met by most other of the requirements. </p>
<p>And believe me, I’ve been obsessively filing through the catalogue- You could easily double major or even a double major/certificate (sort of like a minor) if you planned ahead. That’s 7 classes, plus two if you don’t test out of a language. Your freshman seminar can fufill one of the 7. Majors are anywhere from 8-15 courses. If you want, you can even petition to have your class fufill (a) requirement. You take on average 32 classes, so even if you somehow managed to not take ANY classes relating to your major, you could still feasibly double major (27 courses left) or take a major/minor (six courses) or a certificate with your major, or depending on the majors and certificates major/major/cert or major/minor/cert. (and if you still needed the foreign lang, then that’s 23 classes left…)</p>
<p>This is good, because I can’t make up my mind about anything, and may attempt to do something that crazy.</p>
<p>ERGO: The number of courses to complete a major is very, very important to how ‘flexible’ a program really is. Figure out the Average # of classes a student would take, then subtract the core courses. Without assuming those classes fit into your major, how much wiggle room do you have?</p>
<p>You’d have 35 classes open if you tested out of a language, I’m guessing. But I would never want an applied engineering class, so again, flexibility becomes relative. /dunno how many courses the avg major is @ Stanford</p>
<p>Heh…*stuck at the stanford website reading *</p>