The Core Fight Begins

The first salvos in the battle over the College's proposed Core Curriculum rang out last Tuesday, but by the time the echoes had faded it was apparent that the Faculty debate will not produce many surprises.

Over 300 Faculty members jammed into the Faculty Room for the first round of the debate on the core proposal, which they will take up again at next month's Faculty meeting.

They were joined by student members of the Committee on Undergraduate Education, representatives of the student media, and four conspicuous non-students--undercover University police officers, clad in grayish ties and carrying concealed walkie-talkies, who were there to deal with a student protest that never materialized.

The only protest that did materialize came from several Faculty members, who scored the core proposal on several grounds.

Several members of the various natural sciences faculties contended that the proposed core does not place enough emphasis on teaching the physical sciences and mathematics to students in other disciplines.

William H. Bossert '59, McKay Professor of Applied Mathematics, then criticized the philosophical basis of the core, which he said is a vain attempt to insure a broad but superficial intellectual background for all students.

Bossert instead proposed a system that would encourage "personal maturity," by requiring students to study in depth only in a major and a minor field before receiving their degrees.

But after Bossert and Harrison C. White, professor of Sociology, had made their joint pitch against the core, the tone of the debate changed.

After hearing several anti-core speakers, President Bok--who chaired the meeting--recognized mostly defenders of the proposal, such as Bernard Bailyn, Winthrop Professor of History, and Michael L. Walzer and Stanley Hoffman, professors of Government.

By structuring the debate that way, Bok appeared to adopt a strategy of allowing core critics their say, and then rolling out the "big guns" on the Faculty to shoot down the anti-core arguments.

Thus the first meeting was probably the greatest expression of opposition the Faculty debate is likely to generate.

From here on, the key phase in the development of the core will probably lie in the process of suggesting amendments to the proposal, as representatives of various departments attempt to convince Dean Rosovsky and the Faculty Council of changes they believe are important.