<p>Which schools have strong core curriculums like St. Johns or Columbia?</p>
<p>I am finding that Brown, Hampshire, Wesleyan, New College, Amherst, Smith, and Antioch use the open curriculum. Any others?</p>
<p>Open: Vassar, Smith, and Amherst (I think) immediately come to mind.</p>
<p>Core: (St. John's isn't really a core - it IS the curriculum). Chicago, and (though more innovative) Scripps. Lots of colleges have common freshman seminars and the like.</p>
<p>For open, add Sarah Lawrence, Bennington College, and Marlboro.</p>
<p>Johns Hopkins is pretty open too.</p>
<p>Wesleyan does NOT have an open curriculum. It has a distribution requirement.</p>
<p>Open - U Rochester</p>
<p>According to Wesleyan's website, they have gen ed "expectations", not requirements:</p>
<p>"A student who does not meet these expectations by the time of graduation will not be eligible for University honors, Phi Beta Kappa, honors in general scholarship, and for honors in certain departments."</p>
<p>So strictly speaking, they do have an open curriculum; they just make it difficult for a student who doesn't do the "expectations."</p>
<p>My S came up against these "expectations" when it was made clear to him that he could not graduate if he did not take another science course (he thought he'd already fulfilled the requirement for that). I think this is is a distinction without a difference.</p>
<p>Marite; that being so, I wonder how that square that with wha they explicitly say? It would be an interesting case to see on what basis they were insisting.</p>
<p>Garland:</p>
<p>Yes, it would. The reminder came in his last semester, too, and it produced quite a bit of stress!</p>
<p>There are people who don't meet the requirements. It's surprising that the reminder came this last semester and his advisor didn't warn him and guide him in past years - that's faulty advising. However, he can't graduate with honors, but he can still graduate.</p>
<p>Precisely. If there are requirements, then it's not an open curriculum--which is what this thread is about. And no, he could not graduate even without honors, without satisfying this expectation/requirement. Since he was told way after pre-registration was over, it took a good three weeks to get him into a class that would satisfy the requirement even though it was way over his head. Believe me, if he could have done without that requirement, he, we, the Chair, the profs and the Dean would have been very happy not to have to deal with it. And his GPA would have been higher, too. And yes, it was faulty advising, though admittedly, he should have been more vigilant and proactive. My younger S has an online report that spells out which requirements have been met and which still have to be fulfilled. It is kept up-to-date.</p>
<p>Brown is the most well known with NO- ZIP-ZERO core requirements.
U of Rochester only requires English.</p>
<p>Carnegie Mellon requires English and requires about 30 credits (approximately)to be taken throughout any of the other schools. They don't, however, tell you what to take. Thus, if you want to take your 30 credits in the business school, it will be allowed.</p>
<p>I understand why there might be an objection to mandatory core courses. But, could someone offer a legitimate objection to the standard distribution requirements (3 courses in each of the three divisions, some of which can be satisfied with AP credits)? I don't understand the fascination with this issue.</p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>Open curriculum + generous pass/fail policies + grade inflation = happy customers </p>
<p>Brown's officials are THE marketing experts in higher education.</p>
<p>InterestedDad:</p>
<p>My S2 nearly applied to Brown. The students he met told him how wonderful it was to be in class with students who were taking the class because they wanted to take it not because they had to. Contrast that with the evaluation of required courses in many colleges: "For a required course, it's not too bad." "I only took it because I had to fulfill a requirement."
I do, however, personally support the idea of distribution requirements. Forcing kids, like my S2 who is rather narrowly focused, to take courses outside of their areas of interest and comfort, is, to my mind, highly desirable.</p>
<p>Yeah. And just for sanity it makes sense to dabble in some different fields. For example, can you imagine taking 32 semesters of lab science and problem set math without sprinkling in at least a few courses where you read good books about world affairs or history or literature or art or music? I mean, you'd go nuts with the problem sets, not to mention that you'd be pretty boring.</p>
<p>Or, conversely the fanatic social sciences major. At the very least, any poli sci/econ/soc/psych major needs to take enough math and statistics to do a research paper.</p>
<p>It just seems like this topic generates SO much chatter among applicants and nobody really sits down with a course book to figure out that it is much ado about nothing.</p>
<p>I understand why specific required core courses could be undesireable. But, I just don't see the problem with simple distribution requirements. If they are that onerous, the student really should be thinking about a tech school or an art school or whatever.</p>
<p>xiggi,</p>
<p>No doubt Brown has many happy customers! I was one of them :) </p>
<p>However, there are solid intellectual reasons for open curriculum beyond pleasing students. In fact, when they've audited what students actually take, it turns out that over 90% of Brown graduates have fulfilled typical college distribution requirements without being forced to do so. </p>
<p>Of the <10% who do not, remember that there can be many "legitimate" reasons for this. Some kids are double or triple concentrators or are on some other specific passionate course of study requiring intense interdisciplinary immersion. Some have already explored at quite advanced levels prior to Brown. And certainly some kids must miss the typical requirements by only a course or two. </p>
<p>Academic laziness at Brown is VERY unusual. </p>
<p>The big payoff of a Brown education is that, having been deeply engaged and happy (and in complete control) for four years, the typical Brown graduate has a great head start into life-long passions, a high bar expectation of deep engagement with interesting, satisfying work, and an ability to navigate uncharted waters without direction from others. Thus Brown grads are disproportionately entrepreneurs, no surprise.</p>
<p>Even missing the boat on an academic area can be a learning experience; learning from a mistake is quite powerful. </p>
<p>Basically Brown front-loads adulthood and picks kids who are ready for this challenge.</p>
<p>Grinnell is open.</p>