Introducing, or Just Assuming Knowledge?

To the editors:

In light of recent constructive criticism on the Core program in The Crimson's editorial pages, I wanted to raise an issue that has gone unmentioned thus far. When bemoaning restrictions on non-Core courses which meet Core requirements, I have heard that many departmental courses would be too difficult for students in other concentrations to succeed--not for difficulty of material but for commonly used terms and definitions or approaches to the material accepted in one department but confusing to another.

While this rings true for many science courses--as an English concentrator I couldn't handle a course like Experimental Embryology--I know that in my own department this presents less of a problem than may be assumed. In English, and I would imagine in many other humanities, few courses have prerequisites. I have enrolled in English courses where the professor assumed a familiarity with critical works and vocabulary I didn't have.

If this concern is standing largely in the way, it could be defused by asking professors to decide whether the prerequisites for their courses should keep the course from meeting Core requirements or not. A careful assessment of how big a hurdle assumed knowledge is in a particular course should go a long way towards evaluating its ability to be a Core; such assessment, I feel certain, would result in a large number of additions to acceptable departmental courses.

Mary C. Campbell '01-'02

Feb. 1, 2001