Smith is vice provost for Undergraduate Education College of
Letters and Science.
By Judith Smith
Editorials in the Daily Bruin have suggested that changes in
General Education requirements were motivated by Tidal Wave II, or
a need to save money. Neither is true.
General Education reforms began in 1997, two years before the
concept of Tidal Wave II was introduced. And the reforms were not
cost-saving measures; the price tag has been two million dollars
annually.
As vice provost for Undergraduate Education since 1996, I have
worked with history professor Ed Berenson, chair of the
College’s GE program, and physics professor Mark Morris, the
chair of a campus-wide faculty-student workgroup on GE reform. In
1997, we wrote a blueprint for reform called General Education at
UCLA: A Proposal for Change.
A Proposal for Change recommended three major revisions in our
curriculum: the creation of first-year cluster courses, an
expansion of discipline-based writing (later called “Writing
II”), and a comprehensive overhaul of the GE course
requirements.
The creation of GE cluster courses was the first recommendation
we implemented. These yearlong, team-taught courses, which focus on
interdisciplinary topics such as the global environment, have been
highly praised by students and faculty.
Since the GE cluster program began in 1998, 51 of our finest
faculty members have designed and taught in nine different cluster
sequences to more than 3,000 freshmen. This is an exciting
beginning for this program; our ultimate goal is to accommodate
about 45 percent of the freshman class in up to 10 clusters
annually, each with an enrollment of 160 to 200 students.
Expanding our discipline-based writing through “Writing
II” began in 1999. In three years, our faculty have created
44 new writing-intensive courses. More than 3,400 students have
completed these courses, all of which have sections limited to 20
students in order to optimize the instruction of critical
writing.
Indeed, a substantial part of the money spent on GE reform has
been used to increase the number of small courses that emphasize
student-faculty interactions, including 120 new cluster seminars
and the 44 new Writing II courses.
Work to revise the course requirements began in the winter of
1999, when the GE Governance Committee, chaired by Dr. David Rodes
(of the English department), began to focus on a new plan for these
courses. The committee’s goal was to design a more coherent
curriculum with courses that provide a greater scope of study and
offer more opportunities for small-group discussions,
interdisciplinary work and seminars.
After much discussion, the faculty approved the
committee’s framework for course requirements and the
Academic Senate’s Legislative Assembly recently ratified the
plan.
Now, there is much work to do: three committees, one for each of
the new foundational areas ““ Humanities and the Arts, Society
and Culture, and Scientific Inquiry ““ will review all GE
courses this spring, with students participating fully in this
process. Departments are revising old GE courses and designing new
ones; courses approved under the new GE curriculum will be ready
for the 2002 freshman class.
The full impact of any educational reform takes time; 8-10 years
is typical to complete such an ambitious process. Reforms can be
contentious and often require compromise, and they always demand a
great deal of faculty effort. However, we are already starting to
see the benefits: with the reduction in GE units from 56 to 48,
more students will have the opportunity to complete a minor or a
double-major. Both can add substantially to a student’s
preparation for graduate studies or professional school.
The size of the College’s freshman class will not begin to
increase until 2005. From 2005-2010, the plan is to enroll an
additional 150 to 200 first-year students each year. By the time
the next decade begins, the College’s undergraduate
population will have been increased by 750 to 1,000 students, not
by 4,000 as reported in the Daily Bruin. The 4,000 figure is
actually a reflection of an expected increase in units taken, and
not physical bodies.
General Education is an important component of an outstanding
liberal arts education, and our students deserve to study a GE
curriculum that involves the full scope and quality of the academic
disciplines at the university.
I am confident that freshmen who come to UCLA during this
tidal-wave period will find a vibrant and accessible GE curriculum.
We are laying the groundwork for this curriculum now, and I believe
the benefits will be worthwhile for every UCLA undergraduate.