A Far Too General Education

The overhaul of Harvard’s Core Curriculum is one of the most important projects facing administrators, the Faculty, and students today. Thus far, the Committee on General Education has made some encouraging decisions for the future of Harvard undergraduate education. The committee’s preliminary assessments indicate an advocacy of distribution requirements over three general subject areas, as well as two mandatory Harvard College Courses that will be “broad in scope and ambition.” But while distribution requirements will allow for more student freedom in class choice, the committee’s failure to define exactly what a Harvard College Course will entail is worrying; without this clear articulation, it is difficult to support introducing these courses into the College’s new curriculum. If the committee hopes to gain widespread acceptance of its proposed changes, it must do a better job of describing the reforms it wishes to make.

The three areas of proposed distribution requirements will include: The Sciences and Technology, The Humanities and the Arts, and The Study of Societies. The strength of this new structure stems from the fact that students will be able to fulfill their requirements with departmental classes, as well as with the traditional Core classes that will return to their rightful places in the departments. A greater array of classes will make it easier for students to select courses that interest them in one of the three areas. And with more student enthusiasm and interest comes better classes.

However, there is a danger in just having a general education curriculum made up of distributional requirements. Students may neglect large swaths of subjects and focus on a fairly insular section in one of the general areas. This is hopefully where Harvard College Courses will be effective. These courses will serve to fill in some of the educational holes left by the distribution requirements by surveying large academic domains. In other words, if a student only takes classes on volcanoes to fulfill his or her science requirements, a Harvard College Course will ideally give him or her a broader overview of the sciences that, while perhaps including geology, is not limited to it.

In order to reach this aim, the structure of Harvard College Courses should follow the example of classes like Social Studies 10. This class does an excellent job of providing an overview of the major thinkers and ideas in social science; and the teaching style of the course could easily be replicated. Equally important is ensuring that Teaching Fellows (TFs) for Harvard College Courses are especially well-trained teachers. The committee suggests that Harvard College Courses should consist of two hour-long lectures and two hour-long sections per week. Classes will very likely be dependent on TFs, and therefore it is critical that the TFs selected to teach in these classes understand effective teaching styles and have a firm grasp of the key aspects of each class.

At this point though, it is impossible to know if Harvard College Courses will actually achieve the above goal. The wording used to describe these courses is so vague that it is questionable that even the members of the committee know what a Harvard College Course will involve. In order for the committee to muster up any support for the proposed curriculum changes, it must explicitly state in greater and more concrete detail what a Harvard College Course is. Only then can the committee hope to get backing from students and Faculty.