Task Force on the Curriculum in the Liberal Arts
Executive Summary
May 2005
Note: Each Task Force Report is a collection of background information, analyses, and recommendations that are submitted to the Planning Steering Committee and the President. Over the summer, the Steering Committee and the President will review and discuss all 15 sets of recommendations together in the context of the College's available resources.
The Task Force on the Curriculum in the Liberal Arts was appointed by President Liebowitz in January of 2005 as part of Middlebury's strategic planning process. The Task Force was charged with examining the College's curriculum and considering how it serves the College's mission.
The Task Force met weekly between January and May, and conducted its research and interviews for the most part between meetings. We met and consulted with a wide variety of faculty, students, and staff who were interested in curricular issues and/or had a particular expertise in one of the areas of focus identified in the Task Force charge.
The Task Force examined the Middlebury College curriculum in relation to Middlebury curricula of years past and to the curricula of other institutions. This examination resulted in the development of several general principles and assumptions, from which the remainder of the group's goals and recommendations follow:
• The Middlebury College curriculum is essentially coherent and rigorous (in itself, and in comparison to the curricula of other liberal arts colleges) and accomplishes its goals of providing liberal education to its students.
• Perhaps as a result of our curricular coherence, there is very little vocal faculty interest in major curricular reform at this time.
• Projected growth in the size of the faculty should serve to reduce teaching loads and enrollments rather than to expand the number of majors and programs we offer.
• The College should continue to support the development of curricular offerings that reflect its commitment to diversity.
Given the College's curricular strengths and the potential for growth in the size of the faculty, the Task Force believes that we have the opportunity to refine and enhance aspects of our curriculum, including especially these six major areas, which are discussed in the report. These areas, and the most significant recommendations related to each, are described below:
I. Distribution Requirements
1. Reexamine the question of whether Middlebury should continue to allow students to opt out of 1 of the 8 academic categories, and in particular whether students should be required to take a foreign language, a lab science, and/or a course in quantitative reasoning.
2. Provide more faculty oversight and input regarding the definition, granting and reviewing of course tags. Clear tag definitions will help faculty as they design courses. Periodic review will help insure the continued strength of required elements of tagged courses.
3. Articulate the rationale behind the curriculum more fully in the College Catalog, and be sure the Catalog conveys the rigor of the curriculum.
II. First Year Seminars and College Writing Courses
1. Make it clear to departments and programs that the First Year Seminar program is the college's highest curricular priority, and must be staffed ahead of all other curricular obligations.
2. Establish a regular rotation of FYS teaching for full time faculty; at a minimum, each faculty member should teach one FYS every four years.
3. Develop a reliable formula for determining each department or program's obligations to the college writing program. Enforce those expectations.
4. Develop a separate, additional course evaluation form for FYS and CW courses, focused on the quality of writing instruction, and of advising, as appropriate.
III. Advising, including both first year and major advising
1. Faculty should be made more aware of the importance of academic advising in the lives of our students. Chairs should be encouraged to emphasize this issue within their departments and programs.
IV. Double (and Triple) majors and their impact on the curriculum
1. Further study of the enrollment patterns of double majoring students should be undertaken to determine whether students with two majors get an education that is less consistent with a liberal arts philosophy.
2. Students need to be aware of the philosophical and practical compromises that may occur as a result of double majoring.
3. Students should be restricted from pursuing more than two majors.
V. Senior Work, especially whether it is possible or advisable to require independent research of all seniors
1. Make individualized senior work a requirement for departments who want that as their culminating senior academic effort.
2. Provide sufficient faculty and financial resources for the above changes, where necessary, to take place.
3. Rework the language in the current course catalog to reflect both the importance of and the rigor of senior work.
VI. "Peaks" of the curriculum, considering how we designate, represent, and take advantage of particular curricular strengths
1. College publications should avoid the use of the term "peak" in reference to those previously identified areas of the curriculum.
2. Future resources, such as faculty and staff positions, should be allocated on the basis of demonstrated need or compelling rationale, rather than on the basis of "peak" status per se.
Members:
Susan Campbell, Chair
Bob Cluss
Katharine deLorenzo
Peter Hamlin
Chris Keathley
Brett Millier