Long a fixture of Harvard College’s curriculum, the Expository Writing requirement aims to teach incoming freshmen how to draft provoking theses, structure persuasive arguments, and write effective essays of academic caliber. And yet, since its conception in 1872, the program has been reimagined more than once. Most recently, the College has decided to provide students interested in the Humanities with an alternative method of fulfilling the “Expos” requirement: taking the two-semester sequence of Humanities 10a and 10b.

As this change implicitly acknowledges, the existing Expos program is imperfect because it is too formulaic to be useful to all students and to encourage their interest in writing. That said, the idea of having some writing requirement is a good one and the program is eminently salvageable. The administration’s decision to consider a full year of Humanities 10 as a valid stand-in for the traditional single semester of expos is a step in the right direction.

Before this year, students could only fulfill the Expos requirement by taking an Expos 20 class. Students with less writing experience take one semester of Expos 10 before taking the universally required Expos 20. Expos 20 classes discuss varying topics, but purportedly hone the same skills in students across the board: argumentation, clear writing, and self-revision.

But the appearance of choice in subject matter is largely illusory. Students sectioning for expos must rank eight classes by preference, and though the disciplines covered range from art history to sociology, the lottery process does not guarantee that students are placed in a discipline that resembles their academic interests or prepares them for the kind of writing they are most likely to need in their further coursework.

This issue, along with varying levels of experience in most Expos 20 classes, undoubtedly compromises the effectiveness of the program. Students often suffer through a semester of Expos that does not tailor the material to their interests or its instruction to their needs.

That said, a small percentage of lucky students enroll in Expos sections that align well with their interests. These freshmen, who report that Expos gave them invaluable writing skills, are evidence of Expos’ potential. The best way for Expos to serve its students is to combine its current emphasis on rigor with a greater focus on the kind of writing they will be expected to do in later stages of their studies.

The College’s move to have Humanities 10 count for Expos represents an evolution towards this vision of an improved writing requirement. We hope the College will realize that offering discipline-specific courses as Expos alternatives is productive and appealing to students, and will quickly follow this move by adding similar classes from other disciplines to the Expos curriculum. More general classes should continue to exist for those unsure of what they will be studying or who do not have the same writing experience.

Likewise, the requirement of an application for Humanities 10 seems an effective method of ensuring that the class is pertinent to its students on all levels, from subject matter to pace and style of instruction. Still, having only one Expos-eligible class for which students must apply is an untenable and unequal situation; while the College may be using its experience with Humanities 10 as a test run, it should move quickly to include more such courses for students interested in disciplines other than the Humanities.

Expos has long been considered an integral thread in the fabric of Harvard’s liberal arts education. Indeed, its mission is part and parcel of the college’s commitment to creating well-rounded students and effective communicators. The College was right to begin a creative re-structuring of the program; it should now continue to improve Expos so that the requirement is better tailored for all its students.