Such a system would not work at research-oriented Harvard, says Belnap, because faculty do not wish to spend time in the classroom outside their specialty.

Dominguez agrees, saying that at Harvard, where scholarship is crucial to gain tenure, professors tend to confine themselves to specific areas of study and to teach concentrators and graduate students.

But Dominguez says the very breadth of the Core sometimes brings professors unexpected benefits.

Without the Core, Harvard's faculty might "retreat to their departments and their research," Dominguez says. Professors reluctant to teach Core courses may gain new academic perspectives by extending into related areas, he says.

Meanwhile, University of Chicago Dean Ralph W. Nicolas says that creating small classes also depends on a university's will.

"We believe more in discussion than in lectures," at Chicago, Nicolas says, "More time with faculty members in small classes has always been our particular way of doing things here."

Chicago undergraduates must take four year-long courses in the humanities, social sciences, biological sciences and physical sciences.

"It is a pretty intensive program," the dean says. "It guarantees that all students in the college will have a common ground for discussion."

But Nicolas says that though "it is the right program for our university," the program might not work in other institutions.

But Geyser University Professor Rosovsky, founder and father of the Core, says he thinks the choice made possible by Harvard's large faculty is one of its most important attributes, even a decade after its beginning.

"There are very few universities that have as large and varied a faculty. I view choice as a very good thing as long as the educational purpose is fulfilled. I think it is a great plus to have faculty teach in areas they really care about."

Next, what students think