The Global Core is still very much a work in progress. This year students have returned to campus to find a revised list of Global Core courses that includes more seminar-style and fewer lecture-based classes.
Patricia Grieve, the Nancy and Jeffrey Marcus Professor of the Humanities and chair of the Committee on the Global Core, said there are also stricter standards in place for determining which courses satisfy the requirement. Classes must now include the use of primary materials, and the Committee on the Global Core will give preference to comparative courses.
Eighty-four courses are now approved, compared to more than 120 last semester. Grieve emphasized that the committee shortened the list as a result of its new standards, but could expand it again in the future.
Alex Jasiulek, CC ’13, who led a survey of the student body as the president of the Class of 2013 last year, said the changes are a step in the right direction. But he added that the administration still has a ways to go.
“They’re glossing over the fact that while there are the added seminars, there still remain courses like History of the Modern Middle East that are huge,” Jasiulek said. “If they’re committed to these principles, I want to make sure the courses that existed before the Global Core did are still being held accountable to the [new] standards.”
Jasiulek helped prepare recommendations about changes to the Global Core last year. These recommendations included smaller classes, more “theoretical engagement,” and a “discussion of the interaction between Western and global ideas.”
Students have had mixed reactions to their new Global Core options.
Isaac Bunch, CC ’14, said he worries the new list will limit students’ choices. He said the Global Core should give students a chance to branch out and fears that a shorter list could result in scheduling conflicts.
“If there wasn’t a choice, the University would be telling us what global cultures are more important to learn about, and they’ve already done that with putting Western culture up front with Lit Hum and CC,” Bunch said.
But Malika Leiper, CC ’13, said the addition of more seminar-style classes will force students to delve deeper into the texts in their Global Core classes. She thought the previous requirements weren’t focused enough and welcomed the tighter standards.
“I felt like it [the Global Core] was kind of just there to be there, but it didn’t seem to have a focus,” Leiper said. “I think it could be a good thing that they’re trying to have a clearer goal.”
Naomi Senbet, CC ’14, said she is ambivalent about the addition of new seminars, but concerned about the shortening of the list.
“Choice is always better,” Senbet said. “There are so many options out there that I don’t think eliminating certain lecture-based classes is going to change how people view the Global Core.”
Jasiulek said he is worried professors and administrators are not fully engaged in the restructuring process. But despite his concerns, he said he is pleased with the new list and course selection standards, adding that some of the new classes on the list are “fantastic.”
“They [the Committee on the Global Core] did produce a lot of positive results this year,” Jasiulek said. “I’m not sure if what we have this year would have happened if we had not engaged in this conversation.”
COMMENTS
Comments will be moderated in accordance with our comment policy