Members of Group 4 met five times in the fall and met weekly in the spring to discuss issues concerning general education at the College of Charleston. Our discussions during the fall were broad-based and covered a variety of general issues. Our discussions during the spring were focused on trying to answer specific questions. This report is a summary of our discussions, including various concerns and assumptions which influenced our decisions, specific suggestions for reforming general education, and a discussion of issues associated with reforming general education.

Our discussions in the fall brought to light a variety of issues and concerns which somewhat guided our discussions in the spring. The group reached consensus on three issues in the fall:

We also discussed a number of ideas, some of which carried into our specific suggestions, and some of which we never had time to fully develop. Among the ideas we discussed in the fall were the role that the various Schools should take in delivering our general education curriculum, the relationship between general education and a student’s major, and more emphasis on interdisciplinary work. We discussed the idea of making general education the shared responsibility of all five of the Schools and somehow incorporating coursed from all of them. Currently the School of Science and Math and the School of Humanities and social Sciences provide the overwhelming majority of general education courses. Courses from the School for the Fine Arts and the School of Business and Economics fulfill (at most) six hours of a student’s general education curriculum, and no courses from the School of Education fulfill general education requirements. We were intrigued by the idea of trying to increase the involvement of all five schools, but we were unable to design a model for this in the limited time we had.

The relationship between the general education curriculum and a student’s major and the emphasis on interdisciplinary work were issues we carried into this semester’s discussions. Our suggestions reflect a concern for these ideas.

Our discussion this spring was more focused on specific questions/issues. We began the discussion this semester by answering several questions. First, should our general education curriculum be built around common core courses plus various clusters of courses, or should we construct a general education curriculum based entirely on clusters? We voted that the curriculum should be built around core courses and various clusters of courses . A discussion then ensued over what constitutes a "cluster" of courses -- are clusters to be constructed around disciplines, skills, themes, or some combination of these elements?

Second, are there specific courses that should be required of all students? Our group agreed that all students at the College should be required to take English 101 and 102 (unless they are exempt from the courses because of AP credit or are in the Honors program and taking Honors English) because writing skills are so important.

Third, how many hours should be devoted to general education? Although we never reached a definite conclusion on this, we decided that the general education curriculum should dictate the number of hours, rather than establishing a set number of hours and forcing the curriculum to fit.

Fourth, do we want to develop a Freshman course that will be required of all incoming freshman? We voted against the construction of full semester long course, however we agreed that a common freshman experience could benefit the students in a number of ways both academically and socially. Our suggestions about changing orientation grew from this discussion and will be explained more fully later in this report.

Finally, we discussed the question of whether or not we should require a general education capstone course or experience. Our group voted against the idea of a general education capstone for a number of reasons. First, many majors now require students to have a capstone course and requiring two such types of courses could be problematic for students. Second, the issue of administering a capstone course or experience for all students presents a variety of potential problems/concerns. Finally, given the diversity of coursed that students can choose from for their general education curriculum, devising a capstone course or a set of capstone courses would be difficult. Our group felt that there may be alternatives to a general education capstone course that we should explore, including the idea of encouraging students to do more internships.

With these general questions answered, we spent the last three weeks of our discussion carefully examining the Goals for General Education which were constructed last year. Our examination of these Goals led us to the conclusions and recommendations which follow.

As we evaluated the Goals for General Education, we operated from some basic assumptions.

Our current general education curriculum provides the structure for the meeting of most of this goal. The element of this goal which is the weakest is establishing relationships among the various branches of knowledge.

Currently, there are some (perhaps many) courses which meet this goal. We believe an effort should be made to broaden the scope of courses, when appropriate, to draw student’s attention to these interdisciplinary relationships.

This goal can be met currently, but not as easily as some of the other goals. Developing a non-western requirement for students is one way to better meet this goal. Additionally, current general education courses should be examined to determine whether and how non-western elements can be appropriately incorporated.

Our current general education requirements emphasize the development of skills in reading and writing more than the development of oral communication skills. There are ways in which all three of these skills can be better taught and emphasized in the general education curriculum.

This goal can be met currently. Some professors/courses/departments meet this goal more effectively than others; greater awareness of the goal and commitment to it would be advantageous. Additionally, this goal can be more effectively met not only through the general education curriculum, but also by encouraging more students to pursue minors so they are exposed to more than one discipline in some depth.

The first two elements of this goal, the ability to retrieve and use information, are being met more than the third element, the ability to evaluate the information. In order to evaluate information students have to have good critical thinking skills. While some students are able to do this, others are not. Our current general education curriculum often emphasizes the retrieval and use of information, but not always the critical evaluation of that information.

We grouped these two goals because we felt these goals can be taught/reinforced in courses, but these goals are mor fully met through the student’s activities and experiential learning in internships and independent study opportunities.

This goal should not be thought of as belonging only to a student’s general education curriculum, but should be applied to student’s major(s) and minor(s) as well. Based on anecdotal evidence of students who have gone to graduate school and/or students who return to the College after graduation, we believe this goal is currently being met.

Based on our analysis of these goals and the degree to which we believe they are currently being met, we offer the following specific suggestions for our general education curriculum.

The current structure of the general education curriculum is fairly satisfactory. Requiring students complete courses in specific subject areas -- English, history, natural science, social science, mathematics, humanities and foreign language -- clearly meets Goals 1 and 5, and provides a structure for meeting Goals 2,3 and 4, depending on the courses students choose to take. With this in mind, we suggest the continuation of the following core courses:

We did not have sufficient time to critically examine and discuss the full rationale for the current clustering of courses in the science, social science, mathematics, humanities and languages areas. We also did not have time to fully discuss or explore the rationale behind having students take the number of hours required in each of these areas. However, our discussions throughout the year did emphasize and reinforce our belief that students should be exposed to courses in these clusters of disciplines, and that exposing students to at least two courses in any one cluster is important so they gain both breadth and depth of knowledge about that discipline.

Although the structure of our general education curriculum is fairly satisfactory, we do believe some improvements can be made through the following changes

Students could take HIST 103 and 104 for their history requirement

In addition to these specific suggestions for change, we discussed two other changes in the general education curriculum. We recommend these changes in principle, but feel the current efforts of the school/departments should be acknowledged and decisions they make should be considered.

Finally, as we have already mentioned, we believe it is important that departments and majors assume some of the responsibility for the meeting of these goals which define a well educated person. While the courses students take to fulfill their general education requirements begin the process of meeting these goals, the student’s major must continue to emphasize some elements of skill and knowledge acquisition to ensure that the goals are continued throughout the student’s college experience. We would encourage all departments and all majors to try and incorporate more of the following elements in their programs:

We recognize that some professors/courses/departments currently strive to meet these suggestions, and we commend them for this. We also recognize that it is no possible or appropriate to try to incorporate each of these in every course we teach. However, we believe that an overall commitment to these ideas would benefit the students and would extend and reinforce the skills and knowledge they learn in their general education courses.

Due to time constraints and difficulties group members had being able to meet on a consistent basis, some ideas/issues/concerns were not discussed and/or resolved. Over the course of our discussions though, some general conclusions can be drawn about issues associated with this proposal.

We recommend that students are encourages to use their full college careers to complete the general education requirements. Encouraging students to integrate general education courses complement courses in their major. Granted, a student’s first two semesters will emphasize general education courses, but students should be encouraged to take courses which will fulfill general elective credits or courses which might introduce students to disciplines they are considering for their major and/or minor.

We recommend that the current general education curriculum structure be maintained. There are specific courses that all students should take, but we believe that studetns should be given a high degree of flexibility in choosing which courses they want to take to fulfill their general education requirements. By clustering courses in the disciplinary areas we ensure that students are exposed to the various disciplines which Goal 1 identifies as important. Increasing the total number of hours students are required to complete for graduation will maintain a good balance of general education courses, general electives students may take, and hours required for the completion of a major and minor.

The concept of a liberal arts education is to expose students to a wide variety of subjects and disciplines. Students should be expected to have a basic understanding of what a liberal arts education entailsm, and should be prepared to draw connections between disciplines. Because some students do not have a clear idea of what a liberal arts education is, we can increase their understanding and their ability to make connections by pointing some of these things out in classes. This can and should be done both within general education courses and within courses in the student’s major/minor.

Courses in the general education curriculum introduce students to bodies of knowledge and encourage them to develop various academic skills. Both the knowledge and skills should continue to be emphasized in the student’s major and minor courses.

Extra-curricular activities, whether formal or informal, are important to the education of our students. We would encourage students to take advantage of extra-curricular opportunities both on and off campus. However, the value of extra-curricular activities does not offset the value of a student’s class experience. By increasing the number of hours for graduation, we can encourage students to take advantage of extra-curricular opportunities such as internships and independent studies without significantly decreasing their classroom learning.

These two issues were not discussed in any detail. We like the idea of all five schools being involved in the general education curriculum, but we have limited suggestions for how this can be accomplished. The orientation/freshman experience course should be staffed with faculty from all departments in all five schools.

As far as assessment is concerned, we did not have time to discuss this and have no specific suggestions.

Two of the changes we are recommending require potentially significant resource expenditures. The development and staffing of the orientation/freshman experience will require a number of resources including staffing sufficient sections of the course (as many as 50+ in the fall and probably 20 in the spring) to accommodate all the incoming freshman and transfer students each semester. Additional resources associated with this will revolve around the opening of the dorms and cafeteria early since students will be required to report one week before standard courses begin. Finally, there should be a coordinator for this course to oversee staffing, making sure materials are provided, establishing and enforcing the general guidelines for the academic component of the course, etc.

The second recommendation that will require resources be allocated is potentially requiring students take a conversation course with their language courses. (Again, we think any decision about this should be guided by the language department and their own decisions about revising the way the language courses are taught.) If students are required to take the conversation course, resources will have to be allocated for the staffing of these courses.

General education at the College of Charleston needs to be modified; as it currently exists, it meets many of the goals we identified last year, but there is room for improvement. The suggestions we have offered are derived from the discussions and conclusions we were able to have. There were ideas and issues that we simply did not have time to explore. We did not have time to examine the rationale behind the number of hours required to meet each disciplinary cluster of courses. We did not have time to examine whether or not any new disciplinary clusters of course requirements should be added to the general education curriculum. These are important issues to consider, and perhaps these are issues that can be addressed in the general forums.