Those concerned about how the current curriculum review will affect their academic program should rest assured that no major changes will be decided upon or implemented anytime soon.
The Curriculum Architecture Committee completed a proposal earlier in the year on possible changes to the curriculum. This blueprint is an attempt to help propel a conversation and process concerning possible future changes to the curriculum.
The proposal focuses on a number of issues, among them are whether to synchronize all freshmen tutorials to be taught in the first semester; to design a one-semester course similar to Culture and Traditions to be taught in the spring semester of either freshman or sophomore year; to create a senior capstone course; extending spring break to two weeks and offer senior comprehensive examinations in the second week; and changing distribution, English, foreign language, and major requirements.
The Senior Council concluded formal discussions of the Architecture Committee proposal on March 13 and produced a thorough report on their deliberations. The Council is virtually unanimous in its support for having all Freshmen Tutorials in the fall semester. It rejected overwhelmingly the idea of having Freshmen Tutorials mirror the sophomore C&T class, but a majority of the Council favors offering C&T as a one-semester course for sophomores during the spring semester. A majority was not in favor of making interdisciplinary and team taught courses a focus of the curriculum and was unanimously opposed to elimination minors.
The Council was, however, receptive to the idea of making minors optional instead of a requirement. The Council is almost evenly divided on the idea of allowing additional credits in the composition of majors. It opposes additional senior courses as a requirement. It overwhelmingly supports leaving the senior comprehensive exams the way they are but signals that the return of Senior Study Camps, which would presumably be during the first week of a two-week spring break, may be an incentive to move the comprehensive exams to what would be the second week of spring break.
Overall, the Council hopes its report, as it states, “will serve as a valuable resource to the Curriculum Architecture Committee and the faculty-at-large in regards to student opinion on the various issues present in the new curriculum proposal.”
The current curriculum was set in place in 1973 at a time when Wabash’s enrollment rates were declining. The prospect of changing it understandably evokes questions. However, the faculty and administration stress that the process going forward is meant to be instructive rather than definitive.
“This will take time,” said Economics Professor Frank Howland. “I don’t think most students would be affected by these things.”
Howland went on describe the logistical reality of implementing any change to curriculum. First, a change would require the around 80-member faculty-at-large to agree on what will be in the proposal, a proposal that has been recently revised, and then the faculty would have to vote to approve it, which those involved signal they are not ready to do. In fact, the next faculty meeting, which is scheduled for the upcoming Monday, is the last faculty meeting of the semester.
In addition, some of the curriculum changes that are being discussed would require creating entirely new courses and contracting others, like packing two semesters of C&T into one semester. Curriculum changes would like require shuffling class schedules. For example, if all Freshmen Tutorials will be taught during the fall, then instructors who currently teach their tutorials during the spring may have to change the time or drop altogether courses they have organized that conflict a new requirement.
“Something’s got to give,” said Howland. “The pieces have to fit together.”
Dean of College Gary Phillips agreed. “We are trying to find a conversation that would bring these pieces together” he said. “Last week, as we had a discussion about the whole proposal, it became clear to that the faculty was far from the point of being clear about what were the most important things to talk about. The faculty needs to focus on what are the things we’re consenting to [and] what does the institution hold most important.”
“It will take a while,” said Dr. William Placher who was part of the Architecture Committee. “It’s not going to happen quickly but I think these are the kinds of things that faculty members and the students should be talking about. How do we give Wabash students the best education? As far as curriculum goes we haven’t really talked about it in about 30 years, so I think it’s time. And it may turn out that not much changes but at least we’ll have a better idea about why we’re doing what we’re doing.”
“I have no idea where this is going,” said Dr. Morillo, who was also part of the Architecture Committee. “Some don’t want to change a lot because there are a lot of different and disparate interests among the faculty. Thus, working out something that is acceptable to everyone is difficult.”
Amid the uncertainty and complexity of developing and implementing a partial or wholesale change to the curriculum, students should not expect to be affected by anything anytime soon.
Those concerned about how the current curriculum review will affect their academic program should rest assured that no major changes will be decided upon or implemented anytime soon.
The Curriculum Architecture Committee completed a proposal earlier in the year on possible changes to the curriculum. This blueprint is an attempt to help propel a conversation and process concerning possible future changes to the curriculum.
The proposal focuses on a number of issues, among them are whether to synchronize all freshmen tutorials to be taught in the first semester; to design a one-semester course similar to Culture and Traditions to be taught in the spring semester of either freshman or sophomore year; to create a senior capstone course; extending spring break to two weeks and offer senior comprehensive examinations in the second week; and changing distribution, English, foreign language, and major requirements.
The Senior Council concluded formal discussions of the Architecture Committee proposal on March 13 and produced a thorough report on their deliberations. The Council is virtually unanimous in its support for having all Freshmen Tutorials in the fall semester. It rejected overwhelmingly the idea of having Freshmen Tutorials mirror the sophomore C&T class, but a majority of the Council favors offering C&T as a one-semester course for sophomores during the spring semester. A majority was not in favor of making interdisciplinary and team taught courses a focus of the curriculum and was unanimously opposed to elimination minors.
The Council was, however, receptive to the idea of making minors optional instead of a requirement. The Council is almost evenly divided on the idea of allowing additional credits in the composition of majors. It opposes additional senior courses as a requirement. It overwhelmingly supports leaving the senior comprehensive exams the way they are but signals that the return of Senior Study Camps, which would presumably be during the first week of a two-week spring break, may be an incentive to move the comprehensive exams to what would be the second week of spring break.
Overall, the Council hopes its report, as it states, “will serve as a valuable resource to the Curriculum Architecture Committee and the faculty-at-large in regards to student opinion on the various issues present in the new curriculum proposal.”
The current curriculum was set in place in 1973 at a time when Wabash’s enrollment rates were declining. The prospect of changing it understandably evokes questions. However, the faculty and administration stress that the process going forward is meant to be instructive rather than definitive.
“This will take time,” said Economics Professor Frank Howland. “I don’t think most students would be affected by these things.”
Howland went on describe the logistical reality of implementing any change to curriculum. First, a change would require the around 80-member faculty-at-large to agree on what will be in the proposal, a proposal that has been recently revised, and then the faculty would have to vote to approve it, which those involved signal they are not ready to do. In fact, the next faculty meeting, which is scheduled for the upcoming Monday, is the last faculty meeting of the semester.
In addition, some of the curriculum changes that are being discussed would require creating entirely new courses and contracting others, like packing two semesters of C&T into one semester. Curriculum changes would like require shuffling class schedules. For example, if all Freshmen Tutorials will be taught during the fall, then instructors who currently teach their tutorials during the spring may have to change the time or drop altogether courses they have organized that conflict a new requirement.
“Something’s got to give,” said Howland. “The pieces have to fit together.”
Dean of College Gary Phillips agreed. “We are trying to find a conversation that would bring these pieces together” he said. “Last week, as we had a discussion about the whole proposal, it became clear to that the faculty was far from the point of being clear about what were the most important things to talk about. The faculty needs to focus on what are the things we’re consenting to [and] what does the institution hold most important.”
“It will take a while,” said Dr. William Placher who was part of the Architecture Committee. “It’s not going to happen quickly but I think these are the kinds of things that faculty members and the students should be talking about. How do we give Wabash students the best education? As far as curriculum goes we haven’t really talked about it in about 30 years, so I think it’s time. And it may turn out that not much changes but at least we’ll have a better idea about why we’re doing what we’re doing.”
“I have no idea where this is going,” said Dr. Morillo, who was also part of the Architecture Committee. “Some don’t want to change a lot because there are a lot of different and disparate interests among the faculty. Thus, working out something that is acceptable to everyone is difficult.”
Amid the uncertainty and complexity of developing and implementing a partial or wholesale change to the curriculum, students should not expect to be affected by anything anytime soon.