While students who pack Sanders Theatre for courses such as "Justice" and "The Bible and it Interpreters" are accustomed to large Core classes, even Sanders might seem crowded this year as students scramble to fulfill their requirements from a list of Cores at a seven-year low.
The number of courses offered this year is 19 fewer than last year, 86 total compared to the 105 offered in the 1995-96 school year. Not since the 1989-90 academic year, when the offerings in the Core Curriculum dropped to 83 courses, has the total been lower.
This statistic, which is not adjusted for two course cancellations, has not gone unnoticed.
James T.L. Grimmelmann '99-'98, an Undergraduate Council representative who serves on the Committee for the Core Program (CCP), which reviews and approves courses for the Core, says the unusually low number is a serious problem.
"It's an argument that something needs to be done," he says.
Some administrators and Faculty members agree.
"I am very concerned with the number of course offerings in the Core this term," Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles writes in a fax.
Susan W. Lewis, director of the Core Program, says the difference is not significant, attributing the number to year-to-year fluctuation.
"It's up and down, depending on things like Faculty leave. The only area that is regularly low, and exceptionally low this year is Moral Reasoning," Lewis says.
Only one Moral Reasoning class, "Reason and Evaluation," is offered this term.
CCP member Luis Fernandez-Cifuentes, professor of Romance languages and literatures, says the low figure is not necessarily a cause for alarm.
"It has been discussed in passing, but it is not such an essential problem," he says.
Former Dean of Undergraduate Education Lawrence Buell says that during his tenure as Dean, the Committee worked on widening the variety of Core offerings.
"There was always very strong desire to increase the number of Cores, particularly in areas where there is not a large number of courses, such as Moral Reasoning," Buell says.
Lewis says the reason for the sharp drop was not that this year's numbers are particularly low, but that students are comparing them with 1995-96 totals, which were an all-time high.
"[Last year] wasn't an average year by any means," she says.
Lewis also said the total number of courses was also not the only factor the Core Program takes into account.
"It's always a concern when their choices are limited.... It wouldn't help students if we had 100 courses only in three areas. We're not only concerned about distribution across fields, but also over semesters and time," she says.
Factors in Fluctuation
Members of the CCP say the number of Cores offered per year is affected by many factors.
"There are a lot of constantly cycling variables. It's sometimes hard to keep them in place from year to year," Lewis says. "That doesn't mean we shouldn't try."
The availability of Faculty members to teach the Cores is the most important factor in the number of courses offered, many professors note.
They go on to assert that the num- They go on to assert that the numbers are especially dependent on the number of Faculty taking unexpected leaves or who vary their Core teaching with a departmental course. "Sometimes people have unexpected problems. If they all come together at the same time, that can upset the apple cart, so to speak," says Clowes Professor of Science Henry Ehrenreich, who is a member of the CCP and the professor for Science A-15: "Dynamics and Energy." "We have not discussed this [particular statistic] in Central Committee yet," Ehrenreich adds, referring to the CCP group that has final say over course offerings. Buell says he expects that the CCP will address the matter. "I would be surprised if this were not already a subject of discussion among the committee members right now," Buell says. Lewis says that the usual pattern for Core teaching is for Faculty members to teach Core classes in alternating years. "If for some reason, we have some people whose cycles are disrupted, they can all come together [teaching Cores] in the same year," she says. Knowles, however, acknowledges that this can be a problem and says coordination of leaves between departments is something that needs to be improved. "I think (and agree with Dean Pilbeam) that we need better overall curricular planning in the departments (coordinating faculty leaves and balancing conflicting goals, of [e.g.] departmental and Core courses). We shall work harder on this," Knowles writes. The lower number this year is due to changes across the board in all subdivisions, but unusually large drops in Moral Reasoning and Historical Studies A, which both have five fewer offerings than last year, contributed to the overall decrease. "As far as the actual numbers, the fact that there are three Moral Reasonings [this year] is unacceptable," says Eric M. Nelson '99, chair of the council's Student Affairs Committee, which has been examining the Core. "We all know it has been a problem; I'm sure the Faculty is not unaware of it," he says. "Three is too few," admits Michael J. Sandel, professor of government, who chairs the subcommittee on Moral Reasoning and Social Analysis and also teaches the popular fall course Moral Reasoning 22: "Justice." "We are working hard to assure that there will be more next year," Sandel adds. "It has always been difficult to recruit Faculty to teach Core classes in Moral Reasoning because there is a relatively small pool of Harvard Faculty who teach in the areas of moral and political philosophy." Knowles says he hopes to solve this problem soon by adding more Faculty positions in areas like philosophy, which should enlarge the pool of faculty for Moral Reasoning courses. Knowles says he expects the funding for the new positions to come from the ongoing capital campaign. However, additions to the Core can take time, as new courses must undergo a lengthy examination process. "It takes a year or two for a course to be fully fleshed out from the proposal," says Pope Professor of Latin Language and Literature R.J. Tarrant, the professor of Literature and Arts C-61: "The Rome of Augustus." "There is a hiatus between when Faculty end one course and start up another one," Tarrant adds. "That's probably the best suggestion I can come up with for an answer." However, Knowles also suggestes that the Core may have been neglected, noting that the Faculty's energies over the past several years have focused on improving the non-Core curriculum. Faculty Involvement Although some say that Faculty are willing to teach Cores, others say that the rigors involved in teaching a Core course alienate some Faculty members. "Some people don't want to do it. They prefer the freedom of departmental courses, where they can teach whatever they want and no one looks over the syllabi," says Fernandez-Cifuentes. The process of getting a course into the Core Curriculum is a difficult one. The subcommittees of the CCP are responsible for soliciting Faculty members and developing courses. The Central Committee has the final approval. Fernandez-Cifuentes says the process "can be very irritating." "The syllabi are scrutinized by all the committees...The syllabi go back to the professor with corrections, all sorts of things like this," he says. Teaching a Core course can be taxing in other ways as well, Sandel says. "Not all Faculty members want to teach large classes with many section leaders to recruit and supervise," he says. While Fernandez-Cifuentes and colleagues such as Sandel say the recruiting difficulties are perennial, Grimmelmann says he believes there has been a growing lack of Faculty interest in recent years. "There's less of a Faculty-wide commitment to the Core," says Grimmelmann. Because many new members of the Faculty have come to Harvard since the Core was developed, they do not have as strong a connection with the program as the Faculty members who originally helped to develop the program, Grimmelmann says. But many Faculty members dispute Grimmelmann's conclusions, saying there is not much change in willingness to teach or in the efforts of the CCP to solicit proposals. "Certainly the criteria for proposals haven't changed," Tarrant says. "Our interest in generating proposals hasn't changed." Dean of Undergraduate Education David Pilbeam says he does not think Faculty members' willingness to teach is responsible for the decline. "From my admittedly limited discussion with colleagues, I do not see any diminution in enthusiasm for the Core, and I think the somewhat smaller number of courses this year is part of the normal variation," Pilbeam writes in an e-mail. And Pilbeam's predecessor says maintaining the Core's philosophy is always of paramount concern. "There's a great feeling of responsibility to look very closely at the proposals, to make sure that the whole topic fits the subject area [of the Core]," Buell says. "As far as the willingness of the Faculty to step up and offer courses, I was not conscious during my time of striking ups and downs. Some people want to teach Cores, some people don't." Fernandez-Cifuentes says the Committee on the Core Program would not relax its standards when evaluating course offerings because of Faculty interest. "We wouldn't compromise because of it. I don't think we will bend over backwards because some Faculty do not want to teach," he says. "The rigor and the seriousness of the Core is going to go on as it has for the past 15 years." Core Reform Whether these fluctuations in the number of courses offer are normal for the Core or not, Pforzheimer University Professor Sidney Verba '53, chair of the committee re-evaluating the Core this year, says the occasional shortfall is a key area of concern. "I think that's one of the key problems with the Core, that it's sometimes difficult for students to find Core courses to take," Verba says. "We'll hope to address that in our report." "The obvious solution is getting more courses into the Core. But certainly that's easier said than done," Verba says. "Absolutely, the limited number of courses is intrinsically a problem with the Core program," Nelson says. "It makes a very valid argument for expanding the number of courses." However, Fernandez-Cifuentes says he thinks that the current system is satisfactory. "I am one of those who complains about it, but we can live with it. One has to deal with it on an adhoc basis," he says. "I don't know if the Dean can do anything about it, but [the problem] is not something in the guidelines." While the Core is a concern, Knowles says, it has to be considered in the larger context of undergraduate education. "We have to balance the demands of so many desirable things: small-group instruction, faculty-led seminars, thesis supervision and research opportunities and expand the Core and ensure that all the basic departmental courses are covered," Knowles writes. "We shall try harder to guarantee a balanced menu." And Lewis promises that next year will be an improvement. "We already know there are going to be more next year," she says.
Read more in News
Kennedy's Children in the '70s
