Despite Promises, Core Remains Sparse

We've heard it time and again--a constant gripe with the Core Curriculum is that there are not enough choices within the 11 academic areas.

Despite nearly four years of sincere efforts to broaden the Core's offerings in response to student complaints, limited progress has been made.

In May 1997, the Faculty of Arts and Sciences voted that 12 courses be offered annually in each Core area, not including cross-listed Core classes or departmental alternatives.

This year, Foreign Cultures was the only area to surpass the goal with 14 offerings and a vast array of cross-listed Cores that count for credit.

Other areas, however, have lagged behind for years. This year, for example, Literature and Arts B and C offer 10 classes in total; Historical Studies A and B, and Literature and Arts A offer nine; Science A and B, and Social Analysis offer eight; and Moral Reasoning and Quantitative Reasoning offer a paltry six.

Professors say they are willing either to allow their courses to count for Core credit or to teach actual Core classes. There is no good reason, it seems, that those responsible for overseeing Core offerings have failed to reach their target number of courses per year.

Becoming a Core

New Core classes can be created in two ways. Members of the Core subcommittees can solicit their colleagues, or individual teachers can independently propose courses.

There are six subcommittees: Historical Studies, Literature and Arts, Science, Moral Reasoning and Social Analysis, Foreign Cultures, and Quantitative Reasoning.

These subcommittees reach out to newly hired faculty, often treating them to lunch while introducing the idea of teaching a Core.

While the subcommittees do approach senior faculty members, professors who are interested in teaching a Core class will frequently approach the subcommittees themselves.

According to Susan W. Lewis, Director of the Core Program, this is "a constant process which goes on all year, every year."

Faculty members then submit detailed proposals, akin to syllabi, which include a rationale statement and a description of the required written work.

"Sometimes there is negotiation with a professor. It is very unusual to simply reject a proposal," said Andrew D. Gordon, professor of history and chair of the Historical Studies subcommittee

If a subcommittee ratifies a proposal, it is forwarded to the Standing Committee on the Core, which includes Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles; Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68, Dean for Undergraduate Education Susan G. Pedersen '82; and the subcommittee chairs. The Standing Committee then makes the final decision.

On February 20, the Standing Committee approved several Core courses for the coming years, including "Jews in Modern Times: From the French Revolution to the Emergence of Israel," "The Russian Revolution" (Historical Studies B) and "Powerful Habits of Mind" (Quantitative Reasoning).

Shifting Cores

Students can also petition for Core credit for taking departmental classes. Though it is often difficult for students to wade through the red tape, professors say from their end, it isn't difficult to allow their courses to count for Core credit.

Robert J. Kiely, professor of English and a faculty member of the Literature and Arts subcommittee, is "in favor of having more departmental alternatives to give students a lot more choice."

Beginning next year, new departmental classes will count for Core credit. Economics 1010A: "Microeconomic Theory" will count for Social Analysis, English 13: "The English Bible," English 124d: "Shakespearean Tragedy" will count for Literature and Arts A, and English 175: "American Literary Emergence" will count for Literature and Arts C.

Professors say that allowing a departmental course to count for Core credit does not significantly change the structure of the original course.

Kiely, who will be teaching "The English Bible," said that nothing will be changed now that it will count for Core credit.

"I wouldn't change the curriculum," said Kiely.

Harris said that the basic structure of his History 1585 course will not change, although the "methodology may need to be more transparent."

His class relies heavily on reserve readings, which will be cut back in his new class simply because reserve readings become less readily available with large classes.

This is the second year that Michael I. Blake, assistant professor of philosophy, is teaching Moral Reasoning 62: "Reasoning In and About the Law." It was taught two years ago as Philosophy 12, but the intention was for it to become a Core.

Philosophy 12 had 45 students; in contrast, there are over 800 students enrolled at present in Moral Reasoning 62.

"It was a particularly hairy teaching assignment," he said, " [but] I like teaching the Core a lot. I really enjoy it. I'm trying to entice people into philosophy."

The enrollment may have skyrocketed, but the course is essentially the same. "It's had two years of refinement, but it's really has the same structure and much of the same material."

Though teaching a large class can be intimidating, some professors say they enjoy the opportunity to share their knowledge.

Peabody Professor of Music Lewis Lockwood has taught Literature and Arts B-55: "Opera: Perspectives on Music and Drama" since the early 1980's.

"I have enjoyed giving this course, and have the feeling that it has been well received by a long line of Harvard students, at least so I am told by former Teaching Fellows and former students," writes Lockwood in an e-mail.

According to Gordon, professors like to tell people about the subjects they love and teaching Cores is a "way to give training and experience to graduate students."

Core Woes

For some professors, allowing a departmental course to count for Core credit is not a daunting decision. Yet, Gordon says, "There are a lot of reasons a professor would think twice about teaching a Core course. Enrollment is likely to jump, and some would prefer to teach 50, not 250."

Gordon notes that "you have a lot of pressure to be an entertainer" and the "Core guidelines can be seen as restrictive."

In the Historical Studies categories, there are a number of restrictions, namely that Historical Studies A must cover material up to present times, and Historical Studies B must be about a discreet event. Thus, "some great [departmental] courses may not fit well into A or B...A lot of courses would require reworking" [in order to meet Core guidelines], Gordon says.

Susan Lewis says that some Faculty members like to keep departmental classes small for concentrators, even if their classes do fit the guidelines for the Core.

Moreover, many departmental classes are designed to achieve very different goals from Core classes.

"Perhaps more will be designed that meet the aims of the Core, but there aren't many at the moment," said. Lewis.

Another concern for some is finding the necessary staff for large classes.

"Finding qualified teaching fellows is a large concern if a course becomes much larger [once it counts for Core credit]," Kiely says.

If at First You Don't Succeed...

When asked about the failure to increase Core offerings to meet the designated goal over the last few years, subcommittee chairs say the solution lies in better recruiting.

"We've been working with new faculty and we've had some more success," Robert P. Kirschner, professor of astronomy and chair of the Science subcommittee, says.

Leverett Professor of Mathematics and Chair of the Quantitative Reasoning Subcommittee Benedict H. Gross projects that things will be better next year.

"We'll have a few more departmental alternatives, but we're looking to create more quantitative reasoning classes," he said.

There will be at least six, and possibly even eight, QR courses offered next year and Gross remains optimistic because "there's a lot of enthusiasm for teaching this aspect of the Core."

It is true that there have been efforts to increase Core offerings within each category. But using these methods, 10 of the 11 Core categories have still failed to reach the target of 12 course offerings per year.