Gen Ed Versus Core Remains Murky for 2012

Since the General Education curriculum was approved by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences nearly two years ago, preparations for a transition away from the Core have slowly been taking shape.

Now, current students will have the chance to experiment with the new curriculum—having the option to elect to fulfill requirements under Gen Ed or the Core. Though the choice is available for all, it represents a far more viable possibility for current freshmen.

But while Advising Fortnight, which concluded on Sunday, encouraged current first-years to consider their concentration options, few freshmen feel that they are being properly educated about their impending choice between Gen Ed and the Core.

Still others feel that the decision-making process is a hassle, or that they are getting shortchanged because of their status as a transition class.

“It’s really annoying that we have to choose which one to take. I thought I would like it, but it actually just makes things really confusing, and I feel like neither program is at its strongest right now,” said Sofie C. Brooks ’12. “So I am getting the short end of the stick no matter what I choose.”

In order to make their decisions, students will either need seasoned and knowledgeable advisers or will have to be proactive in seeking information.

They will have to weigh course availability in each program, oscillating concentration possibilities and the structure of each curriculum in making a decision.

And while the incoming Class of 2013 will not have a choice to make with regard to curriculum, it is unclear what their understanding of Gen Ed might be upon matriculation.

TO MAKE THE CHOICE

The nature of freshman advising is such that some students may end up with an adviser who is directly involved in the implementation of Gen Ed—Dean of Undergraduate Education Jay M. Harris was on the board of freshman advisers last year—while others may be assigned first-year graduate students at one of Harvard’s other schools.

This variability leads to differing degrees of preparedness among academic advisers in directing freshmen about which curricular option to choose.

Brooks, whose adviser is a grad student, said she thought “the College has not done a good job at advising me which one would be best.”

But Alex M. Sarkisian ’12, whose adviser Christina McFarlane works in the Freshman Dean’s office and has a joint appointment with the Advising Programs Office, wrote in an e-mail that he was “properly informed of all information by [his] counselor.”

Information is available on the Gen Ed program’s Web site for students who may be proactive enough to seek it out on their own.

The site features a little-known tool for students trying to decide between the two programs. The “Planning Worksheet (Gen Ed vs. Core)” is a downloadable PDF file that students can fill out based on prospective concentration possibilities, allowing them to see which program better suits their needs. The worksheet asks students to find courses that fulfill the requirements in each of the programs, check off completed requirements, and evaluate their findings.

MANY FACTORS TO CONSIDER

In making the decision, course availability has been raised as a cause for concern, as many have worried that students will have a smaller course selection under Gen Ed than under the Core. There are now over 150 courses available for students to fulfill their eight Gen Ed category requirements, in contrast to more than 440 courses that can still count toward the Core’s seven requirements.

“They’ve just recently approved a ton of new courses, which is great. They were originally concerned about not having enough courses,” said Robert G. Doyle, Associate Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, who is also a freshman academic advisor. “But I think the program received a lot of course recommendations just before the deadline because professors are just like students—always finishing at the last minute.”

Doyle said that the Core program is “the more generous route” because it gives students “more options.”

“Because Core courses are still being offered, if a student decides on Gen Ed and a Core course sounds more interesting, they most likely won’t take it, because most Core courses won’t count for Gen Ed, whereas Gen Ed can count towards Core,” Doyle said.

Of more concern than course selection for some students is the prospect of how each curriculum might fit with their course of study.

Adriana I. Colón ’12 said that she has her doubts about whether or not she has been well-informed about the Gen Ed versus Core decision, though she is leaning toward the former. As she considers a VES concentration with a secondary field in History or Social Studies, Colón said that the selection process between the two programs is highly dependent on the concentration she ends up selecting.

“If I end up choosing to create a special concentration, I feel that it would be easier to choose Gen Ed instead of trying to figure out what Core areas I would have to take or be exempt from,” she said. “Also, since Gen Ed classes can count for concentration credit as well, this will leave me with more wiggleroom for electives and such.”

Brooks, a potential Environmental Science and Public Policy or Government concentrator, is also considering graduating under the Gen Ed requirement.

She said that her trouble deciding between majors makes Gen Ed the more appealing option.

“I like the idea of being able to fulfill requirements without having to worry about not needing them later, as Gen Ed has more departmental courses instead of classes designed only to fulfill a requirement,” Brooks said. “I don’t like the idea of taking a class because I have to—I want to spend my time taking classes that interest me and also happen to fulfill requirements at the same time.”

But since freshman academic advisers are more accustomed to advising their students under the Core Program, they may be more familiar with its workings.

“Honestly, I just talked to my academic advisor, who explained what I needed to do to fulfill the Core requirements, and it seemed more straightforward,” wrote Sarkisian, who said he is fairly sure he will concentrate in Government.

But the decision should not be difficult or stressful, said Harris, the leading force behind Gen Ed’s implementation.

Students will have until next fall to make an official declaration about which curricular path they will take.

“At the same time you declare a concentration, you declare the requirement under which you will graduate,” he said. “And just as people can change their concentration, they will have to have the ability to change programs, too.”

LOOKING FORWARD

Beginning with the incoming Class of 2013, students will be required to graduate under Gen Ed. While the program will continue to be developed over the summer in time for the fall 2009 semester, Harvard’s accepted students can learn very little about their academic requirements at present from the Harvard College Viewbook, which merely lists the eight required Gen Ed categories.

Admitted student Xing Lin of Metter, Ga., described the academics section of the Viewbook he was mailed as “vague.”

According to Lin, further descriptions of each of the course categories would have helped him gain a better understanding of the academic requirements he would have to fulfill should he choose to attend Harvard.

“I wish they gave me examples of what classes will fall under each category,” he said. After being directed to the Gen Ed Web site, Lin said that he felt the aim of the program was much clearer, while the description in the Viewbook made Harvard’s academic curriculum seem far more rigid than it is.

“The Web site discusses Harvard’s new Gen Ed program much more thoroughly,” said Lin. “I feel that students have a good course selection for each of the categories.”

But for now, how the rest of the Class of 2013 will be informed of Gen Ed remains to be seen.

—Staff writer Wendy H. Chang can be reached at whchang@fas.harvard.edu.