What Do You Think About CU's Changes to General Education: Part 2

It’s clear that the faculty of Concord University would be affected by the changes to the general education requirements that will be going into effect. But how do they feel about it? Select faculty were asked their opinion on the matter, and how they feel it might affect students going into upper level courses. Some faculty have chosen to remain anonymous to protect their identity.

Caption

Dr. Susan Robinett : “I think the proposed changes to general education to reduce the required hours and to offer more choices for students is very positive.  By having more choices to satisfy gen ed requirements, this opens up more options for students to pursue minors and elective courses that can enhance their declared degree major, and this is further made feasible by reducing the required number of gen ed hours.  The proposed changes can enrich students’ learning experiences as students are given some flexibility in controlling the courses they pursue to fulfill the gen ed program requirements.  Overall, I think the proposed changes are positive for students and will provide for a solid liberal arts education.”

Anonymous: I think the big problem is not general studies keeping students from double majoring, it’s big majors. Why is what we have now important? I think it’s because not all of our students come in having a broad background. That’s why I think more general studies are important. If we’re going to do it, I hope it works out; I hope this is a good thing, and I hope we’re not doing it just to protect the big majors. I hope we’re doing it because we think it’s good for the students.

Dr. W.R. Winfrey: There is a large remedial component to general studies; some of our local high schools are not as good as they should be, and we are doing a disservice to our students by weakening general studies.

Carolyn Worley: The thing with this class is you’re trying to get students coming in here with English 90 qualifications and you’re trying to bring them up to 102 status in one semester. That’s difficult. That student is going to really have to work for it. We’re basically learning what to do this semester. There’s no hard and fast standard. Right now, I think [professors] are just doing the best they can. It also affected our English 414/415, the education portion, because those students were able to get teaching experience teaching 90 level English. Now, all we can do is let them help in the lab experience. As far as how this is going to affect the students, we have no idea and we won’t know for a couple years because you’ve got to get a good sampling of data before you go forward.

Dr. Charles Brichford: I think the faculty senate’s recommendation is better. Certain kinds of changes in general changes are needed, some increase in the courses that can be counted. What can’t be changed is the necessity of an extensive program. Our students need it, it is an essential component of the quality of education which our alumni find has served them very well. We need to be very careful about changing something that has a long record of working very well.

Dr. Anthony Patricia: I still think we have a strong general education requirement. We’re still a liberal arts school, that’s the whole basis of why we’re here. If they[students] have fewer general education requirements for them to meet, it should make it a little bit easier. It may help a little bit in terms of getting there faster, but I’m not 100% certain it’s going to do that. If someone were going to major in English, I would be concerned that they’ve only had one world literature course. Does that mean people who are not majoring in literature aren’t going to be prepared to do whatever their discipline calls for? I don’t think necessarily; in English, yes I do, and maybe in the humanities in general. I think there is going to be something that falls by the wayside in terms of overall education. But I can only speak regarding English, I can’t speak regarding other departments about it.