McCarty said he thinks many of these old courses are not consistent with Gen Ed’s philosophy of imaginative teaching.

“Some of the Core courses that have been converted into Gen Eds, I think, are just not as interesting,” he said.

“I think there’s been less creative effort given to pedagogy and modes of assessments and kinds of projects that students can do.”

MIXED REVIEWS

While some old Core classes have successfully made the transition to Gen Ed, administrators most often point to the newly created classes as the poster children for the new Gen Ed curriculum.

Along with “Science and Cooking,” Harris praised “What is Life?” and Science of Living Systems 12: “Understanding Darwinism”—two new interdisciplinary courses designed specifically for Gen Ed—as courses that “explicitly link to the concerns of students who are not scientists.”

While some new science Gen Ed courses have received high Q score ratings, new Gen Ed science classes are no more likely to receive high Q scores than science Core holdovers that have been approved for Gen Ed—controlling for course-related variables such as instructor quality, difficulty, size, and Gen Ed category.

Only positive professor ratings and designation in the Science of Living Systems category were shown to be connected with a high overall Q score.

Despite receiving positive reviews from faculty members, “Science and Cooking” received an average Q score of 3.77 in Fall 2010, only 16th out of the 32 math and science course offerings listed in the Gen Ed category during the first three semesters after the launch of the program.

Another new course, Science of the Physical Universe 25: “Energy: Perspectives, Problems and Prospects,” earned a 2.83 in Fall 2010, the lowest rating among the 32 course offerings.

Meanwhile, the highest ranked course Science of the Physical Universe 13: “The Physics of Music and Sound,” which received a 4.40 in Fall 2010, is a Gen Ed course that was originally offered in the Core curriculum.

But there is some indication that the Gen Ed philosophy has improved the class. The course instructor, physics professor Eric J. Heller, said he dramatically changed the course to fit the Gen Ed philosophy.

In response to the Gen Ed initiative, Heller adopted the clicker system, moved from Powerpoint presentations to blackboard lectures, implemented in-class peer instruction, and changed the curriculum to make it more quantitative.

Heller said he approaches the challenge of teaching non-science concentrators by regarding them all as “potentially good scientists.”

“I never talk down to any students,” he says, adding that he warns shoppers during the first lecture that his course will be very rigorous.