2008 Woodie Awards
Guest Column: Save CORE
Kevin Tervala
Issue date: 4/8/08 Section: Opinion
There comes a point in every conversation when it appears. It's almost like clockwork. After I reveal that I'm a "history major, possibly doubling in art history," there will be a pause, and then it comes out. "So what do you want to do with that?" I will then fumble around for an appropriate response: "Maybe I'll teach," or "I think I'll go to grad school," or "I'm going to join the Peace Corps." The actual answer: I don't really know. But that answer, while it causes my parents to stay up late at night, doesn't concern me in the slightest. My interests and my passions are so varied and so ever-changing that I have absolutely no clue what I want to do with my life. I find the answer to be, in fact, beautiful. I am not attending college with the primary intent of learning skills for a specific career. No, I came to college for a number of reasons, one of which was to become an educated individual, something that requires exposure to new ideas, new ways of thinking and new subjects.
Unfortunately for me, this university and its recently released strategic plan does not seem to line up with my view on education. This strategic plan, this new vision for the university, completely obliterates the concept of a broad liberal arts education rooted in humanities, science and social science, known here as CORE. Under the new plan, students would take required classes, "which might be studies and/or practice in one or more of the broad areas: Natural Sciences and Technology; Human Behavior, Societies, and Institutions; and Literature and the Arts." These words are not the words of a university that cares about education. Rather, they are a declaration that this university intends to give us a watered-down education, one that doesn't challenge us (or require us) to take classes outside of our comfort zone and to learn new and different ideas and ways of thinking.
I'm sure the university believes that by eliminating CORE it actually enhances our education rather than watering it down. I'm positive they would argue that it gives students more of a choice and allows them to focus on their declared major and field of interest. However, how can we know what our true field of interest is if we haven't been exposed to a broad sampling of them? For example, I never would have known how much I enjoy art history had I not been required to take a History/Theory of the Arts (HA) class through CORE. But the importance of CORE transcends even that. If all you ever do in your life is study one area, then you are only looking at the world, only interpreting your life, through the lens of that field. CORE classes, which span a multiplicity of fields, give students the skills needed to view the world in different ways. The way a humanities major approaches something is very different from the way a science major does. By making students take classes in all of the major fields, we can learn about new ways of thinking about things in addition to some pretty interesting concepts and ideas.
There are certainly problems with CORE classes, ones that desperately need to be addressed. Even so, the concept behind CORE is one that needs to stay at the university, not be tossed out like trash from last night's party. And this is just one of the many reasons why this year's SGA elections are so important. The people that we elect to the SGA will be tackling issues like this one, representing us to university officials. I urge every student to vote on April 15 and 16. I and the other members of the HOUSE Party are committed and will work tirelessly to ensure a quality education for the entire student body through lowering class sizes, providing a more equitable and dynamic funding system for the different colleges and increasing the interdisciplinary work done at the university so professors and students can see the valuable connection that exists between disciplines.
In the end, the concept of CORE needs to stick around because the humanities matter, because the social sciences matter, because science matters, because math matters and because OUR education matters.
Kevin Tervala is a freshman history major and SGA arts and humanities legislator who will serve as an ARHU senator next year. He is running for reelection to the SGA legislature with the House Party.
Unfortunately for me, this university and its recently released strategic plan does not seem to line up with my view on education. This strategic plan, this new vision for the university, completely obliterates the concept of a broad liberal arts education rooted in humanities, science and social science, known here as CORE. Under the new plan, students would take required classes, "which might be studies and/or practice in one or more of the broad areas: Natural Sciences and Technology; Human Behavior, Societies, and Institutions; and Literature and the Arts." These words are not the words of a university that cares about education. Rather, they are a declaration that this university intends to give us a watered-down education, one that doesn't challenge us (or require us) to take classes outside of our comfort zone and to learn new and different ideas and ways of thinking.
I'm sure the university believes that by eliminating CORE it actually enhances our education rather than watering it down. I'm positive they would argue that it gives students more of a choice and allows them to focus on their declared major and field of interest. However, how can we know what our true field of interest is if we haven't been exposed to a broad sampling of them? For example, I never would have known how much I enjoy art history had I not been required to take a History/Theory of the Arts (HA) class through CORE. But the importance of CORE transcends even that. If all you ever do in your life is study one area, then you are only looking at the world, only interpreting your life, through the lens of that field. CORE classes, which span a multiplicity of fields, give students the skills needed to view the world in different ways. The way a humanities major approaches something is very different from the way a science major does. By making students take classes in all of the major fields, we can learn about new ways of thinking about things in addition to some pretty interesting concepts and ideas.
There are certainly problems with CORE classes, ones that desperately need to be addressed. Even so, the concept behind CORE is one that needs to stay at the university, not be tossed out like trash from last night's party. And this is just one of the many reasons why this year's SGA elections are so important. The people that we elect to the SGA will be tackling issues like this one, representing us to university officials. I urge every student to vote on April 15 and 16. I and the other members of the HOUSE Party are committed and will work tirelessly to ensure a quality education for the entire student body through lowering class sizes, providing a more equitable and dynamic funding system for the different colleges and increasing the interdisciplinary work done at the university so professors and students can see the valuable connection that exists between disciplines.
In the end, the concept of CORE needs to stick around because the humanities matter, because the social sciences matter, because science matters, because math matters and because OUR education matters.
Kevin Tervala is a freshman history major and SGA arts and humanities legislator who will serve as an ARHU senator next year. He is running for reelection to the SGA legislature with the House Party.
Submit a letter to the editor or post a comment below.
Be the first to comment on this story