Re: 1 or 2 semesters of FYE?

[Joan I Hawthorne <hawthorn@badlands.NoDak.edu>]

Christine and everyone else with an interest --

I have reluctantly concluded that faculty in English, like faculty across
campus, have an unfortunate tendency to conceptualize gen ed _first_ in
terms of how it's good/bad for their own departmental or personal agenda.
English people truly, truly believe that everyone needs a better
background in literature (for example, something that I've heard argued
here -- "For most of these students who'll major in X, this may be our
last chance to give them a sound literary background").  I think that
is a supportable point.  My problem is that I also think it's supportable
to argue that this is our last chance to make up for an inadequate
background in chemistry, physics, biology, history, govt., foreign
language, philosophy, etc. etc. etc.

I _do_ think there are arguments in favor of comp requirements and I don't
want to drop our own (two semester) requirement.  But I'm convinced that
most benefits of comp can be reproduced in other seminar style courses, if
teachers are committed to it.  And I think there are many courses that
are potentially important gen ed requirements, depending on your
institutional mission, vision, and student body.  

So I'd suggest allowing the open debate.  Talk about what you try to
accomplish in comp, but avoid defensiveness and keep the converation
high-minded and on the purpose of gen ed at your college.  You'll probably
 "win" regardless, but you'll have done so from the high moral ground
rather than from the defending-departmental-turf ground.  And if change
results, look for ways to guarantee that the new courses are as good or
better -- for students -- than the old.

Joan Hawthorne
Univ. of North Dakota