The St. Thomas English department hoped to end student complaints about boring and irrelevant courses by introducing a new core curriculum in the fall of 2011.
Sophomore Evan Babekuhl said she thought the English class she took last year under the ‘old’ core curriculum was too similar to her high school English classes and didn’t teach her how to apply what she learned to her anticipated business career.
“It taught you how to analyze books and stuff and that was good, but it didn’t teach you how to survive in the business world… it was all novels,” she said. “It seemed like it was teaching you how to learn and not teaching you skills that you’ll need to survive in the work force.”
English department chair Andrew Scheiber said the newly implemented English 121 starter course and its subsequent 200-level course were designed to address the skills and levels of students.
“We were trying to imagine how our core requirement in English could serve the mission of giving people skills in writing and literature but at a level that was appropriate to the way that students tended to be taking those courses,” Scheiber said.
English 111 and English 112, the ‘old’ core courses, were implemented in 1994 with the assumption that students would take the two courses consecutively during their first and second semesters as freshmen.
However, when the department conducted research, it found that few students followed the intended path.
“Some students came in with credit for the first course then delayed taking the second course,” Scheiber said. “Some students took the first course the fall semester of their freshman year and didn’t come back to the second course sometimes until their sophomore or even junior year.
“We were just… trying to design a core requirement where the learning plan or objectives would be more effective for students given the point of development at which they tended to take that second course.”
Sophomore Amy Turek said she took her first required English class the fall of her freshman year but hasn’t taken the second course yet because she plans to take it her junior or senior year.
“I’m trying to fit my psychology minor in, and I want to save some of my general classes for later on so I can have a break from my major classes,” she said.
Scheiber said the main change in the English core is how the literature is presented. He said the first course is more of a ‘satellite view’ course, and the second course is more topics based.
Literature and Medicine, a second-level English core course that was in high demand for fall 2011, was a choice that appealed to students majoring in pre-health, Scheiber said.
“Under the old system, something that generated that kind of interest was not really possible to design,” Scheiber said.
Scheiber said that achievement standards under the new system have stayed consistent with the old curriculum.
“Average grades at the 100-level and the 200-level are almost identical to what it was before the new core curriculum came in,” he said.
The department will continue reviewing the new core requirements in the coming months.
“We’re going to be assessing at the end of the year… since this is the first run, I’m sure there will be some tweaking,” Scheiber said.
Heidi Enninga can be reached at enni5264@stthomas.edu.
” ‘It taught you how to analyze books and stuff and that was good, but it didn’t teach you how to survive in the business world… it was all novels,’ she said. ‘It seemed like it was teaching you how to learn and not teaching you skills that you’ll need to survive in the work force.’ ”
That’s exactly the point. To teach you how to learn. The goal of a liberal arts education is to form you into a well rounded human person, one who’s intellectually (and I’d argue spiritually, as well) formed to handle a wide variety of pursuits rather than get you pigeon-holed into being good for only one thing. It’s disappointing to see students and educators lose sight of this goal.
Ryan, I couldn’t agree more.
@Ryan, well said.
I’m overall quite glad to hear of this change in the curriculum.
In agreement with Ryan, not all students are business majors here (*gasp*). Not only is the liberal arts education supposed to help you handle a wide variety of pursuits, it’s meant to create a more competitive applicant for the next step in life. Also, I’d argue that the old were at ” a level that was appropriate to the way that students tended to be taking those courses” I remember being in the advanced English class, and more than one student didn’t know/remember what a thesis statement was…
Ryan, I also agree. One of the goals of a liberal arts education is to make us well rounded humans, and not machines that are only good for one skill in the “work force.” I would hope that all of us as students at St. Thomas are hoping to come out of college with more than just the “skills that you’ll need to survive in the work force.” Part of the reason I enjoy the core curriculum classes is because it gives me a nice change of pace from the classes I take for my major. We have the rest of our lives to be in the business world, newsroom, or wherever else our majors take us. Don’t lose sight of learning for learning’s sake. There’s nothing wrong with that.
Good article, Heidi!
Ryan, you hit it on the head. Well written article, but the student quoted seems to be off the mark in regards to what a liberal arts education is all about. Also, news flash, we aren’t all business majors! It’s good to be able to have skills outside of McNeely Hall!
On a second note, everyone could use a little more English training…some of the writing I have seen from my peers is dreadfully inadequate for ANY career path, including business.