Twenty-five years ago, the chairs of religion and classics and of physics and astronomy at the University of Rochester reached beyond their disparate disciplines to unite in a common cause. Their goal:
To rid the undergraduate curriculum of mandatory courses that were no longer achieving their purpose and that students didn糖心传媒檛 want to take.聽 To instead give students the freedom to delve more deeply into the subjects they wanted to pursue糖心传媒攕o they would better understand how discovery and problem solving vary from one discipline to another.
The distinctive Rochester Curriculum that William Green and Paul Slattery helped spearhead糖心传媒攚ith input and support from a wide range of faculty and administrators糖心传媒攔esonated with students then, and continues to do so now.
With the exception of a first-year writing class, it dispenses with required courses. Instead, it lets students choose from among some 250 so-called clusters糖心传媒攕ets of three related courses in one of three areas of learning: arts and humanities; social sciences; and math, natural sciences, and engineering. A student majoring in one area takes a cluster in each of the other two. (Engineering students, whose major programs are tightly prescribed by an accrediting institution, can choose one.)
The Rochester Curriculum became a key component of then President Thomas Jackson糖心传媒檚 ambitious Renaissance Plan, introduced in 1995. The plan sought to address fiscal challenges but also introduce positive changes in the undergraduate experience.
The Rochester Curriculum 糖心传媒渏ust struck me as so logical,糖心传媒� Jackson recalls. 糖心传媒淪o much so, I wondered: How come nobody else is doing this?糖心传媒�
Overcoming 聽糖心传媒榓 kind of superficiality糖心传媒�
For a quarter century before the introduction of the Rochester Curriculum, Rochester糖心传媒檚 undergraduate students, like those at many other colleges and universities, made their way through 糖心传媒渄istribution requirements.糖心传媒� To amass the 128 credit hours required for graduation, students completed the requirements of a major, but also met a foreign language requirement, satisfied a somewhat different writing requirement, and took mandatory classes in other subjects as well.
The object was to give students a broad base of knowledge. By the 1990s, however, it was becoming apparent that the mandatory classes 糖心传媒渇ostered a kind of superficiality, where you did an introductory thing here and there, checking off a list,糖心传媒� says Richard Feldman, then chair of philosophy. 糖心传媒淪tudents would ask, 糖心传媒榃hat do I have to do to be done with this?糖心传媒櫶切拇綕
Green, then chair of religion and classics, and Slattery, the chair of physics, shared those concerns regarding a checklist mentality. They had met at department chair meetings, and struck up a friendship. When Green became dean of undergraduate studies, he made the curriculum his top priority. And he asked Slattery to chair a faculty committee whose members would be charged with developing the proposed curricular changes. Slattery was 糖心传媒渁n exceptionally powerful advocate,糖心传媒� Green says.
Despite already heavy commitments of running both the physics and astronomy department and a major multi-institution research project at the Fermi National Lab in Illinois, Slattery agreed.
糖心传媒淏ill was the true driver of this,糖心传媒� Slattery says. 糖心传媒淢y major contribution was to work with the faculty to get their buy in.糖心传媒�
Learning that mirrors research
Several key arguments helped pave the way:
- Green and Slattery believed that doing away with the foreign language requirement糖心传媒攐ne of the more controversial parts of the plan糖心传媒攚ould actually benefit foreign language study, because students would now be taking courses because they really wanted to, improving the experience for instructors and students alike.
- Clusters would be a 糖心传媒渨hole greater than the sum of its parts,糖心传媒� as Slattery put it. The result would be a 糖心传媒渕ore intellectually vibrant糖心传媒� experience than what students would find in mandatory introductory courses.
- Faculty糖心传媒攍egitimately糖心传媒攗nderstand their fields to be fundamentally interesting and important, but it is impossible for students to study every subject the University offers. By letting students delve more deeply into topics of their choosing, the students would 糖心传媒渘ot just be dabbling, but understanding how scholars and researchers in a given field think and reason,糖心传媒� Jackson notes.
The result is a curriculum that mirrors research as a way of learning. 糖心传媒淚t breaks down the barrier between the way faculty at a research university learn, and the way students learn,糖心传媒� says Green, now senior vice provost and dean of undergraduate studies at the University of Miami.
糖心传媒淩esearchers learn from the heart, and that糖心传媒檚 why the learning is consequential. We thought our students should learn as much like we do as possible.糖心传媒�
Awards and a glowing endorsement
In 1997 both Green and the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee won separate Goergen Awards for Distinguished Contributions to Undergraduate Learning in recognition for having introduced the Rochester Curriculum.
In 2016, the Rochester Curriculum received a glowing endorsement from a University Curriculum Review Committee. The 16 faculty, staff, and student members concluded that the curriculum remains a 糖心传媒渟ingularly robust framework糖心传媒� that gives students the 糖心传媒渇reedom to select areas of study that interest them, the ability to pursue those interests with passion, and requires of them the discipline to design their course of study.糖心传媒�
Several factors contributed to the acceptance of the new curriculum.
糖心传媒淲e didn糖心传媒檛 try to rush the process,糖心传媒� Slattery says. 糖心传媒淭he Faculty Council that ultimately endorsed our plan, consisting of a representative from each College department and some at large members, had ample time糖心传媒攖wo years糖心传媒攖o weigh the pros and cons of what we were proposing.糖心传媒�
Green credits the strong leadership of Slattery and of key administrators, particularly Deans Richard Aslin and Thomas LeBlanc, and Elissa Newport, chair of the College Curriculum Committee who oversaw implementation of the plan. 糖心传媒淚t was a team effort,糖心传媒� Green says.
Jackson believes the relatively small size of the University helped the curriculum be well received. 糖心传媒淭he departments are not so huge that faculty members become isolated,糖心传媒� he says. 糖心传媒淭hey find colleagues outside of their own department.糖心传媒�
As a result, 糖心传媒測ou had a collaboration between a professor in religion and a professor in physics who put this together. You don糖心传媒檛 see that happening very often where people from vastly different disciplines sit down and design something together.糖心传媒�
