General education requirements’ future debated
Faculty group, students work together in effort to improve
current system
By Rachanee Srisavasdi
In a possible restructuring of the general education curriculum,
faculty from the College of Letters and Science have proposed
several changes, including decreasing GE requirements and centering
GE classes around general themes.
One key proposal by the Phase II faculty workgroup – which
consists of faculty from different departments and a student
representative – is to lessen GE requirements at UCLA. Its aim is
to give students more freedom to take upper-division electives.
Another suggestion is to simplify GE classes into categories,
coined clusters. Students would be required to take three clusters,
each having a sequence of three classes. Cluster sequences would
allow students to learn more in-depth about a particular topic.
"There was a general dissatisfaction about GE classes," said
Mark Morris, a professor in physics and astronomy and chair of the
workgroup. "(They) have become more of an impediment than an
opportunity to learn in-depth.
"We have to define the purpose of GE curriculum and design
classes that support that," he added.
Created last year, the workgroup’s goal is to revamp overall
structure of GEs. Its report found that because there are so many
different classes offered as GEs, the current system lacks a clear
philosophy, and that there are no campus-wide undergraduate
requirements.
"Many people feel the GE system has become a hodgepodge of
classes," said Ruth Milkman, a sociology professor and member of
the workgroup. "If the idea is to have a common experience for
students, then there should be courses designed with that in
mind."
In an effort to include student opinion into their proposal, the
workgroup is holding discussions in which students share their
opinion of needed changes in GE curriculum.
Students who attended the discussions reacted positively to the
workgroup’s proposals.
"I think you’ll get a lot more out of college because you’ll
have time to take classes you want to take," said Mimi Gozman, a
fourth-year sociology student.
Other students agreed that having fewer GE requirements will
help them focus more on their interests.
"It’s easy to get sick of GE classes," said Danielle Tschirky, a
third-year English student. "Especially when the classes are mostly
(given in) large lecture halls that don’t allow for critical
thinking."
Indeed, most GE classes have an enrollment capacity of well over
100. The workgroup also suggested that more lower-division seminars
should be offered to satisfy GE requirements, which would allow
more personalized attention to students.
In addition, members of the workgroup said professors should
make more of a distinction between GE classes and their other
classes. Morris said that the group’s suggestions included that
professors be chosen, rather than assigned, to teach GE classes
.
"I think it’s really good to have professors, who, in GE
classes, are excited about teaching," agreed Jennifer Hoffman, a
fourth-year art history student "It opens a window to life-long
learning and interest."
Students also expressed disappointment in current GE classes,
due in part to the lack of cohesiveness in the curriculum.
"GE classes make me learn what I’m sometimes not really strong
in," Tschirky said. "(Yet), I think it makes students more broadly
educated."
The workgroup hopes to implement student opinion into their
proposals, which will be considered by the Academic Senate later
this year. If adopted, changes in the GE requirements could start
as soon as fall 1997.
The last student focus group will be held Monday from 12 p.m. to
2 p.m. in Ackerman Union 2412. All students are welcome; for more
info call (310) 206-7848.
FRED HE/Daily Bruin
First-year students Erica Callahan (left) and Alyson Richards
discuss G.E. requirements with Ph.D graduate student Sharon
Joyce.
Comments to webmaster@db.asucla.ucla.edu