Arts & Sciences Curriculum
Revised – March 17, 2000
CORE SKILLS AND DISTRIBUTION (CS&D) PLAN
What's "wrong" with the current core? Skills (writing and quantitative reasoning)
requirements are weak; students are able to postpone needed skills courses. Critical Thinking
courses are unevenly defined. The seven Content Area categories (e.g., Ideals and Values, U.S.
Context, etc.) are difficult to define clearly without imposing arbitrary and hard-to-justify
distinctions. In general there is no clear distinction between courses in and those not in the core.
The number of courses designated to satisfy requirements in different categories continues to
grow, while there is often no apparent rationale for why some and not other specific courses are
designated as core. Thus, the curriculum is hard to rationalize to students; transfer students
(~40% of our student body) are especially handicapped by the current system. Students also find
the current core too complex and difficult to navigate, in part because requirements change if and
when one changes one's major.
What's different about the proposed plan? Three features characterize the proposed
plan. First, it is designed to strengthen students' core skills. Second, it shifts from the idea of a
"core" course system (some courses in and others not in core) to a general education approach
that features three area distributional requirements. Third, it highlights and promotes
interdisciplinary teaching and learning through optional, newly developed, innovative
Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry courses. Overall, the plan is simpler, clearer, more streamlined.
Introduction. The phrase "core curriculum" invites the belief that at the heart of a
university education lies a combination of courses that once completed will prepare students for
their major and, more importantly, the world. University studies, however, have always been
subject to the convictions of the current culture. Years ago, Latin, Greek, and theology constituted
the core requirements of almost all universities. In the recent past, history, English, and
philosophy were considered indispensable (and may still be). Most academic departments
regard their disciplines as valuable and worthy of inclusion in a core curriculum. The challenges,
then, for any group of professors and students trying to construct a core are pedagogical, but they
are also political. When old ideals are supplanted by new ones, people want to know why. We
must debate what kinds of knowledge we believe are most valuable, but we must also arrive at
some consensus when we transform that debate into curricular choices. To that end, the Core
Curriculum Task Force has tried to take into account student needs, faculty concerns, and a
changing society. Western civilization is now but one civilization among many. Literary canons
have been shown to neglect or ignore marginalized peoples. Philosophy treats analytic questions
as often as it does historical ones. So where does one begin?
We submit that it is no longer possible to talk about a core curriculum, and indeed that
the current core curriculum, now in place for over ten years, is itself not a true core but a set of
somewhat arbitrarily defined distributional requirements. There are core skills that we all do
agree on: writing, math, foreign languages, and a broad ability at articulation. These core skills
are the vehicles that enable students to undertake serious study. The proposal outlined embodies
a curricular structure that combines a strong emphasis on these indispensable core skills along
with distributional requirements that will allow students to explore the intellectual resources of this
university and its faculty in a broad and challenging way.
The Committee. The Core Curriculum Task Force is a broadly representative group of
faculty from the three divisions of the College, advisors, alumni, and students. It was established
in fall 1997 to review the current core requirements and make recommendations to the Arts &
Sciences faculty as a whole.
Guiding questions. Throughout our discussions, we identified strengths and weakness of
the current core curriculum. Initial discussions centered on ideals and purposes. We addressed
such questions as, What should liberal arts and sciences graduates know and be able to do?
What are we trying to produce? What kind of graduate do we want? A well-educated, wellrounded citizen or a more specialized, highly-skilled expert who is guaranteed employment in an
increasingly technology-driven society? What is the purpose of our general education
requirements? These questions were addressed in terms of the following more specific issues.
How can we balance demands for both breadth and depth? How can we balance the perhaps
out-dated goal of a common experience for undergraduates and the need for educational
diversity? How can we foster interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary education and problemsolving in an educational system that is department-based?
We identified five separate but interrelated parts of what we consider an ideal liberal arts
education. These are:
(1) Core Skills (reading, writing, speaking; math and quantitative reasoning; foreign
languages)
(2) Diversity (gender and cultural)
(3) Interdisciplinary modes of inquiry (Optional)
(4) Breadth via exposure to major academic divisions
(5) Depth in one area of inquiry, as provided by a major
Specific Goals. With these elements clarified, we agreed to (1) strengthen the College's
core skill requirements, (2) maintain the College's culture/gender diversity requirement, (3)
streamline and simplify substantive area requirements, (4) promote interdisciplinary work through
optional Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry courses that provide both breadth and common
experiences for undergraduates, and (5) support and encourage a capstone course in the major.
The Plan in Outline Form.
Curriculum that features:
Also see attached diagram. We propose a new A&S College
(1) A strong foundation in core skills (reading & writing; math & quantitative
reasoning; foreign language) for all students.
-Lower & upper division writing courses (6 hours). No exceptions. The lower
division course must be completed before a student has completed 60 credit hours.
The upper division course must be completed before a student has completed 90
credit hours.
-Proficiency in Math and Quantitative Reasoning (0-6 hours, based upon proficiency
demonstrated by passing approved course(s), advanced placement credit, or
performance on an examination mandatory for all entering students.) Must be
completed before student has completed 60 credit hours.
-Third semester proficiency in a Foreign Language (0-15 hours, depending on skill
level based on courses previously completed and/or testing).
(2) At least one 3 hour course that focuses on cultural and/or gender diversity.
(3) Distributional requirements for breadth and balance:
Students will be required to take 9 hours each in the Arts & Humanities and Social
Sciences and 10 hours (including 1 hour of laboratory) in the Natural Sciences,
regardless of major. Departments teaching natural science core courses will
compose common entrance and achievement standards for all of their core courses.
2
Courses within these areas of inquiry may be applied toward the major. Within
these three areas students must take courses from at least two different
departments. The courses may be either lower- or upper-division.
(4) Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry courses will function as "wild cards" in the
curriculum--that is, students may substitute one (but only one) of these courses (from an
approved list) for any one Distribution course toward satisfying distributional requirements
listed above.
(5) A small-enrollment Senior Experience course in the MAJOR that emphasizes
reading/writing/speaking. (This might be similar to current critical thinking courses,
or could be a capstone or honors course.)
Hours will be distributed roughly as follows:
Core Skills:
Diversity:
Distribution:
Total
06
0-06
0-15
03
09
09
10
Writing Courses
Math & Quantitative reasoning
Foreign language (3rd semester proficiency)
Gender or Culture
Arts & Humanities
Social Sciences
Natural Sciences
37-58
The Plan in Detail. Core Skills. A commitment to literacy and articulateness unites,
propels, and guides the new curriculum. Reading, writing, speaking, mathematics and
quantitative reasoning are essentials, providing the bedrock foundation for the viability,
effectiveness and quality of the entire curriculum. We consider these processes the basis of a
quality college education. We endorse the principle that literacy be a campus-wide initiative, that
excellence in writing, writing instruction, math and quantitative reasoning and their instruction, be
part of the identity of the campus.
Because writing is so fundamental to educational success, we propose both lower and
upper division writing course requirements—with no exceptions. We endorse the policy that
writing be an integral component of all areas of the curriculum. We endorse the goal of
reinforcing writing/reading/speaking skills throughout the curriculum.
Mathematics and quantitative reasoning are likewise critical for success as a student and
as a member of society. We propose that students demonstrate MQR proficiency by passing an
approved course or courses, or by having advanced placement credit, or by performing to a high
standard on an examination mandatory for all entering students. The examination will be
designed to test proficiency in quantitative reasoning using the standards set down by the
Mathematical Association of America (url:http://www.valpo.edu/home/faculty/rgillman/ql). The
examination will also be used to help students decide whether they should take one approved
course or an approved two-semester sequence of courses to obtain proficiency. We endorse the
goal of reinforcing math and quantitative reasoning skills at higher levels in the curriculum.
Foreign Languages engage the student in another culture and in unfamiliar ways of
thinking. The current requirement of third level proficiency is appropriate in an increasingly global
world. Committee members acknowledged that considerable proficiency (at least 3 rd level) is
necessary to learn another culture, its expression, and its ways of thinking. Language proficiency
is demonstrated by placing out of or passing 3rd level courses designated by faculty in the Foreign
3
Language Departments. The number of hours needed to satisfy this requirement will vary,
depending on the student’s background and testing results.
Diversity. The Committee endorses continued commitment to the importance of
understanding the world’s diversity and pluralism through the study of (1) a non-Western culture
and/or (2) the nature and meanings of the categories of race, ethnicity, and gender. Specific
courses that will satisfy this 3-hour requirement will be nominated to a list to be approved by the
College's Curriculum Committee.
Distribution. The purpose of a distribution requirement is to expose the student to the
full range of subject matter available at the University. Thus we ask that each student take 9
hours of course work in Arts and Humanities and Social Sciences, and 10 hours in Natural
Sciences, including a laboratory course. Laboratory experience is essential to inquiry in the
natural sciences, hence the one-hour laboratory requirement.
Optional Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry courses address the question, “How do we
know what (we think) we know?” Because different disciplines and sub-disciplines answer this
question differently—radically differently in some cases—these courses will expose the student to
different epistemologies in a single course while focusing on a single issue, major work or set of
works. Their purpose is to present different disciplines’ principles through studying a specific
topic. These innovative courses must include content from all three areas (Arts & Humanities,
Social Sciences, and Natural Sciences). An example might be a course on a specific
environmental issue from the disciplines of philosophy, geology, and political science.
The rationale for these optional courses came out of discussions about different ways of
knowing-—the extent to which different disciplines emphasize different learning processes such
as observation, description, performance, analysis, cause and effect models, introspection,
interpretation, deductive and inductive reasoning, convergent and divergent thinking, empirical
and rational models, etc. Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry courses will explore the ways in which
knowledge is acquired and tested in different disciplines. Although topic-oriented, they will focus
on the ways in which different academic disciplines engage our capacity to learn. These courses
may be team-taught. Their structure could vary in innovative ways. There will be both lower and
upper division courses from which students can select appropriately.
The purposes of Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry courses are to establish faculty
relationships with students, teach different ways of knowing, build breadth into the curriculum,
give exposure to thinking outside the student’s major, and give students a common experience.
A & S faculty will determine the content of optional Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry
courses. We anticipate that interdisciplinary teams of faculty will create and propose IMOI
courses to the College's Curriculum Committee. Optional means not required but substitutable.
Senior Experience. We envision a low-enrollment course in the major that emphasizes
active participation on the part of the student through extensive reading, writing, and speaking in
class. This requirement will give the graduating senior an opportunity to pursue a topic in depth,
hone basic skills, polish his/her understanding of the major, and integrate his/her undergraduate
experience. Faculty in the major department or program will determine the nature of this course.
Course Designation. Each course used for College requirements would have one (and
only one) of the following designations:
SE: Senior Experience
MQR: Math and quantitative reasoning
FL: Foreign Language
CGD: Cultural and Gender Diversity
WL: Lower-division writing
4
WU: Upper-division writing
NS: Natural Science
SS: Social Science
AH: Arts and Humanities
IMOI/WC: Interdisciplinary Modes of Inquiry/Wild Card
Faculty in departments will designate which area or category their individual courses
fulfill. The College's Curriculum Committee would review and oversee these designations (as it
does now).
Listed below are A & S faculty, staff, students, and alumni who have served on the
Core Curriculum Task Force.
MEMBER
Armstrong, David
Avallone, Linnea
Bagenal, Frances
Bergquist, Erin
Cary, John
Deans, Nancy
Del Caro, Adrian
Dempsey, Matt
Epstein, Steven
Fall, Ray
Goodrich, Kent
Grant, David
Guralnick, Elissa
Huff, James
Jacobs, Janet
Kelley, Sean
Kosanovich, Amy
Lee, Nicholas
Levitt, Paul
Mandal, Tilak
Martin, Kimberly
Medley, Lara
Mills, Claudia
Nielsen, Joyce
Pierpont, Cortlandt
Poyton, Robert
Pyle, Cassie
Raudenbush, Fran
Scarritt, James
Spear, Peter
Stegman, Gerry
Stevenson, John
Takahara, Kumiko
Yoshinaga-Itano, C.
DEPT
EPOB
PAOS
APS
ASSG
98
PHYS 97-98
CHEM
GSLL
98
ASSG
HIST 97-98
CHEM 97-98
MATH 97-98
MATH
UWRP 97-98
GEOG 97-98
WMST 97-98
THDN 97-98
UCSU 97-98
GSLL 97
UWRP 97-98
ASSG 97-98
ASSG 97-98
A&S
97-98
PHIL 97-98
SOCY 97-98
CHEM
MCDB 97-98
Alumna 97-98
Alumna 97-98
PSCI 97-98
A&S
97-98
A&S
97-98
ENGL 97-98
EALL 97-98
SLHS 97-98
EX-OFFICIO
Nishikawa, Richard
Guertin, Elizabeth
Phillips, Susan
A&S
A&S
A&S
97-98
97-98
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
TERM
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
98-99
99-00
98-99
98-99
99-00
99-00
99-00
98-99
98-99
98-99
98-99
99-00
99-00
99-00
99-00
98-99
99-00
98-99
98-99
98-99
99-00
99-00
99-00
5