Top schools that have few or no core classes/distribution requirements

[Jaddua]

<p>Brown
Amherst</p>

<p>I know there has to be more...</p>

[jackpot]

<p>I’m pretty sure Wesleyan has no curricular requirements</p>

[budda]

<p>I know Vassar doesn’t.</p>

[slik_nik]

<p>Rice has very loose distribution requirements… a lot of them can be fulfilled through AP credit.</p>

[Jaddua]

<p>Brown
Amherst
Wesleyan
Vassar
Rice</p>

<p>Any others?</p>

[Weskid]

<p>To clarify, Wes has not distribution REQUIREMENTS whatsoever. However, there are some distribution suggestions that are required to get honors or phi beta kappa (also, some departments require them). They’re pretty easy:</p>

<p>3 Humanities classes, in at least two different departments
3 Social Science classes, in at least two different departments
3 Math/Hard Science classes, in at least two different departments</p>

[ChetMan]

<p>UVA has a program called “Echols Scholars” for top applicants with no core requirements and you can design your own major.</p>

[CollegeXC1993]

<p>Grinnell College in Iowa</p>

[teenage_cliche]

<p>Smith, Hamilton.</p>

[hopefullybrown15]

<p>Barnard (not really sure if you consider that top) has a pretty loose “9 Ways of Knowing” curriculum</p>

[Endicott]

<p>My kid would never have found his life’s passion if he had not been forced to take a distribution requirement.</p>

[nightpwnsj00]

<p>Wesleyan has a suggested Gen Ed program, but you aren’t required to do it. I think it makes you eligible for honors. Smith has something similar called Latin Honors, which is also optional.</p>

[rdh1991]

<p>2nd hamilton</p>

[jackpot]

<p>

My kid would never have found his life’s passion if he had not been forced to take a distribution requirement.

</p>

<p>Um… congrats for your kid? This person wasn’t asking for opinions about open curricula, but considering you gave yours, I’ll indulge and offer a defense. All distributive requirements do is put a lot of kids in classes they don’t want to be in, which negatively impacts not only those kids but also the kids in those classes who DO want to be there. Maybe some kids “find their life’s passion” thanks to distributive requirements, but those people are few and far between.</p>

<p>Many schools have a class nicknamed “rocks for jocks” as an intro to geology. I’d say a majority of the kids taking that class do not have a particular interest in geology and will not attempt to cultivate one in that class. They are just taking it because they need to complete requirements. Now imagine you are a fresh-faced new prospetive geology major, very enthusiastic about your subject, ready to get your first taste of college geology, only to find your class completely full of people who are just going through the motions and have no interest in the course. I don’t know about anybody else, would find that a pretty discouraging environment. </p>

<p>At schools with open curriculums, the only kids you will ever have in your class are kids who WANT to be there, which completely changes the entire character of an institution for the better. They have a completely different environment charged with academic passion, where everybody is truly excited about what they are learning.</p>

[d_smom]

<p>“Quote:
My kid would never have found his life’s passion if he had not been forced to take a distribution requirement.”</p>

<p>There are also many kids who because they were able to dabble where they wanted found passions they never thought they would have. These open curriculum schools allow kids to experiment and find out what they love. </p>

<p>“At schools with open curriculums, the only kids you will ever have in your class are kids who WANT to be there, which completely changes the entire character of an institution for the better. They have a completely different environment charged with academic passion, where everybody is truly excited about what they are learning.”</p>

<p>Excellent point to consider.</p>

[Dad_of_3]

<p>Any time someone talks about open curriculum, Brown is always mentioned. I have no knowledge of Brown, but my old classmate has a son who’s a freshman in Engg at Brown and absolutely disputes this assertion. He says that the path there is no more flexible than it is in other universities if you want to get an Engg degree in 4 years. Is he mistaken or is this a fact?</p>

[Jaddua]

<p>That’s probably because he’s working towards an engineering degree, though.</p>

[Greybeard]

<p>There difference beween major requirements, and university requirements probably accounts for your friend’s son’s experience.</p>

[M_s_Mom]

<p>Back when Grinnell was evaluating their open curriculum and whether to keep it, they found that 95% or so of the students had fulfilled the requirements that used to be in place without the coersion. Of course, what they put in place of requirements was a very customized advising system, where faculty advisors meet with their students regularly. S’s advisor has been persuasive in getting S to take classes in areas that he wouldn’t ordinarily be interested in. And as S’s career goals have evolved, his originally interests have widened. I suspect schools with no distribution requirements have figured all this out.</p>

<p>I also harbor a suspician that many schools with distribution requirements use a lot of large intro lecture classes to get kids to fulfill these requirements because intro lecture classes are cheaper for them. And intro language courses, typically required unless you have a certain level of proficiency, generally aren’t taught by full faculty. These same courses, because they are small, help drive down the student/faculty ratio, so language requirements remain popular with cost conscious schools too.</p>

[samuck]

<p>Vassar always shows up on any list of open curriculum colleges - but in addition to the Freshman Course requirement, there are requirements for both Foreign Language proficiency and a Quantitative course. Are these so loosely applied that Vassar’s curriculum qualifies as ‘open’?</p>