Running head: CORE CURRICULUM IN HIGHER EDUCATION1

CORE CURRICULUM IN HIGHER EDUCATION7

Core Curriculum in Higher EducationHiram RamirezLoyola University Chicago

Core Curriculum in Higher EducationCore curriculums at institutions of higher education allow all students seeking undergraduate degrees to have a common educational experience. This foundational knowledge also prepares students with a basic set of knowledge and skills that faculty can further develop in specialized fields of study. However, not all institutions have the same core curriculum as some emphasize specific academic areas over others. These core curriculums directly reflect the values and mission of their institutions. This paper will analyze five institutions core curriculum by generating themes and identifying gaps in the curriculum. TrendThere are multiple trends that emerged from the review of five institutional core curriculums. First, the development of courses lays the educational foundation for students (Fink, 2003). Foundational knowledge includes basic information about science, history, literature, geography, and other aspects (Fink, 2003, p. 35). This knowledge lays the groundwork for future learning that students engage in as they enter their major and narrow their focus of study. It is clear that all institutions value English and communication as basic tenants of undergraduate education. Each university had a minimum of two courses involving some aspect of communication or English. Three institutions in particular had classes that were sequenced and clearly outlined what had to be completed. Through this sequencing students were able to develop meaningful patterns of information (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999, p. 31). By taking two courses about a specific subject, students were able to explore and fully engage in the topic as they continue to learn about the discipline. In this way, students are learning to master the content and become experts in this area in their own right. The other two institutions, University of Hawaii at Manoa and Texas A&M University, also had English or communication course requirements but they were structured differently. University of Hawaii at Manoa had written communication, oral communication and a writing intensive course as the required content in this academic area (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2015). Though these courses are not sequenced, they still function in the same way as sequenced courses. They allow students the time to grasp the knowledge in this academic area. The three courses could also be another way to facilitate intentional blended learning that could be similar to sequencing. Integrating content from the three courses into each other to support development of connections in each class would be another way to seamlessly educate the students. Texas A&M University on the other hand had a listing of options students could select from but mandated that they take ENGL 104 (Texas A&M University, 2015). The list of offerings allows students to express care in their learning early on and can facilitate the development of a passion for the topic (Fink, 2003). The ENGL 104 course can give students a foundation in this area and the additional class could help expand the students understand. The institutions researched also had math and science requirements but students had the freedom to select from a pool of courses. For example, the University of South Florida offers college algebra, finite mathematics, introduction to computer science, and many other courses as options to meeting this requirement (University of South Florida, 2015). The science requirement for the University of Georgia and the University of Hawaii at Manoa require that one of the science classes must have a lab while the other three institutions did not make this mandatory. Some of the classes offered had labs as an option but there were also non-lab courses. These options allow students to explore their interests as they gain knowledge in these disciplines. The variety of courses also give students an opportunity to explore more patterns and concepts, which can help them better organize the knowledge they are learning. But the content must be connected for the development of these patterns and concepts. For example, if a student took a biology class in the fall and then a physics class in the spring, they may just learn about these areas separately. They may not see the connections between these two classes. But if the courses were designed appropriately they could support the student discover ways to integrate the knowledge they are learning and unearth patterns in the subject matter (Fink, 2003). This tactic would also show the student that knowledge is interconnected and they can begin to learn how to make these connections on their own. Four institutions also highlighted fine art and culture as a part of the core curriculum. But the culture requirement seemed to be blended with history at some institutions. These academic areas all had listings of courses students could take, no sequencing of any of the courses was required. All of the institutions also had humanities or social science as a requirement. This area had multiple courses that could be used to fulfill this obligation. These academic areas allow students to develop their human dimension or understanding of others and themselves (Fink, 2003). By learning more about themselves they are better equipped to determine what they want for themselves and find ways to care about their learning more (Fink, 2003). This personal connection to the content through the human dimension also allows them to see real world relevance to what they are learning. Core Curriculum GapsThe core curriculum at the five institutions illustrated that many of the major themes discussed in the readings are being implemented to support student learning, but there are some flaws in how it is being executed. There could be better organization on how the courses are organized. The variety of course selections for students in taking their core curriculum does not allow for development of conceptual models for students. As mentioned in Bransford, Brown and Cocking (1999), superficial coverage of all topics in a subject area must be replaced with in-depth coverage of a fewer topics (p. 20). Students in this current structure are just learning disconnected facts instead of gaining knowledge that is connected and organized around important concepts (Bransford, Brown & Cocking, 1999, p. 9). Though the broad course offerings in some of the categories in the core curriculum can be problematic, it does help to engage them. The variety of courses available to students allows them to find their passions in the knowledge they are exploring. With an interest in mind, students would be able to become active agents in their educational journey. The core curriculum also illustrated that students do not have time to digest the information and form connections between courses. There is no facilitated reflection or self-examination which could support the development of these connections. The millennial generation, the current generation of college students, have little time or inclination for reflection (Nilson, 2010, p. 11). There needs to be new ways in which students are engaged and encouraged to synthesize what they have learned. Bransford, Brown and Cocking (1999) shared that curricula should also be organized in ways that lead to conceptual understandings (p. 42). In this way, bodies of knowledge are important but without concepts or mental categories to house them, the knowledge is not readily usable by students.To support student learning, the core curriculum could be modified or amended to facilitate increases in student learning. Current course work in the core curriculum could be altered to incorporate reflection during the semester so that students would have structured time to synthesize content and develop patterns. Blending courses between disciplines as a part of the core curriculum to illustrate the interplay between disciplines could also be another way to support the construction of conceptual models. A capstone course could also be added to assist students in drawing new connections and patterns to the knowledge they have gained. This type of class could also allow students to utilize their passion in developing a final project or in translating what they learned into tangible skills. These are just a few examples of how the core curriculum could be modified to support greater student learning. Institutions must continue to find ways to support college students development of conceptual frameworks for the knowledge they learn on their campuses. ConclusionThe five institutions researched had similar core curricula. They all had English, science, math, fine arts and culture as required areas for their students. These communal requirements and even differences in their curriculum express these institutions commitment to educating their students holistically. But even with this wide breadth of knowledge, there seemed to be no synergy between areas or integration of knowledge. Institutions could cultivate synergy in their content by modifying their core curriculum. The core curriculum, as the foundational knowledge for all students, is a key component in developing college students. Through the alterations of classes to include reflection, blended courses between disciplines and adding a capstone in the core curriculum, students could enhance their learning. These practices could also assist students in the development of their conceptual frameworks. Conceptual frameworks allow students to retain and access knowledge gained over time, which is crucial for students. So in this way, the development of these conceptual frameworks are needed if institutions of higher education wish to develop experts in fields.

ReferencesBransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Fink, L.D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to developing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Nilson, L.B. (2010). Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Texas A&M University (2015). University Core Curriculum. Retreived from http://catalog.tamu.edu/pdfs/13-14UniversityCoreCurriculum.pdfUniversity of Central Florida (2015). Undergraduate Catalog. Retrieved from http://catalog.ucf.edu/policies/gepUniversity of Georgia (2015). University of Georgia Core Curriculum. Retrieved from http://bulletin.uga.edu/fall2003/bulletin/prg/core_curriculum.htmlUniversity of Hawaii at Manoa (2015). Undergraduate General Education Requirements. Retrieved from http://www.catalog.hawaii.edu/corerequirements/index.htmlUniversity of South Florida (2015). Foundations of Knowledge and Learning Core Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.ugs.usf.edu/gec/fkl/FKLrequirements.html