General Education

Summary of reform: General education reform varies from institution to institution. According to Gaff (1988), central to general education reform are the concepts content, coherence, and comprehensiveness. The idea of content relates to what students should know and be able to do after graduation. The idea of coherence has emerged, to a large degree, in response to the fragmentation of the general curriculum. A coherent general curriculum seeks to restore higher levels of intentionally, clarity, and rationale to the curriculum. Related to the issue of coherence is integration of knowledge. As a result, interdisciplinary arrangements are important to general education reform. The third idea, comprehensiveness, involves the rethinking of the general curriculum. Such reflection considers content, appropriate pedagogues, and what sorts of institutional support are needed.

Gaff (1992, Washington Center) has posited some important trends in general education and they are as follows. (1) Recognition that Liberal Arts and Sciences are fundamental to undergraduate education. (2) Fundamental skills need greater emphasis. (3) There is a movement towards higher standards. (4) There is also a recognition for the need for tighter, more deliberate curricular structures. (5) There is an strong emphasis on the freshmen year. (6) There is also increased emphasis on the senior year. (7) More attention is being placed on global studies. (8) Emphasis is being placed in integration and interdisciplinary approaches. (9) Moral reflection is receiving more attention, particularly thorough the use of non western culture and literature. (10) Active approaches to learning have gained importance. (11) General education is being reconceptualized to include all four years of undergraduate education. (12) There is more and more emphasis being placed on assessment to determine what is working. Astin (1992, Washington Center) put forth a number of factors that enhance general education outcomes. These outcomes were derived from his study entitled, "What really matter in general education: provocative findings from a national study of student outcomes." These factors are as follows (1) student-student interaction, (2) student-faculty interaction, (3) student oriented faculty, (4) discussion of racial/ethnic issues with other students, (5) hours devoted to studying, (6) tutoring other students, (7) socializing with students of different race/ethnicity, (8) a student body with high socioeconomic status, (9) and institutional emphasis on diversity, (10) a faculty which is positive about the general education program, and (11) a student body that values altruism and social activism.

From presentations given at the 1991 AGLS meeting, it became clear that general education reform needs to be particular to the institution conducting the reform and that assessment is needed to guide such reform (Chertok, Washington Center, 1992). In addition, these presentations also indicated that faculty development is inexorably linked to reform efforts. (Chertok, Washington center, 1992). Finally, Milne (Washington Center, 1992) was careful to point out that good practice, in terms of teaching and stimulation critical thinking, is more effective than the actual discussions of general education reform




Connection to other reforms: The breadth of this reform and its varied outcomes suggest connections to many other reforms. Is a very wide category. For the most part, general education refers to the "core" curriculum of a university or college. It is related closely to critical thinking, cultural literacy, less specialization and greater coherence, higher standards, and interdisciplinary study.
Model Institutions: Grinnell College: clear expectations and a strong advising system coupled with an "open" curriculum. Harvard University: revised core curriculum in which students selecting a course in eight of ten categories of core courses. Kalamazoo College: the Kalamazoo Plan or K Plan. Mars Hills College, Pacific Lutheran University, Sonoma State University, Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville (Feldman, 1988).

Web Site:
Types of institutions: Multiple institution types
Duration: Since late 1970s.
Source list of institutions: AAC
Contact for further information:



Level of institutionalization: Grinnell College: clear expectations and a strong advising system coupled with an "open" curriculum. Harvard University: revised core curriculum in which students selecting a course in eight of ten categories of core courses. Kalamazoo College: the Kalamazoo Plan or K Plan. Mars Hills College, Pacific Lutheran University, Sonoma State University, Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville (Feldman, 1988).

Outcomes: Inquiry, abstract logical thinking, critical analysis, literacy, understanding numerical data, historical consciousness, science literacy, development of values, appreciation of arts, multicultural and international experiences and understandings, and in depth knowledge of a set of given subjects.

Process: Changes or modifications of the existing formal curriculum.




Target of Reform: Institutional

K-12 parallel:

Origination of reform: Association or national level

Support: Government grant-NSF

Linking Characteristic 1: Linking or integrating

Linking Characteristic 2: Making environments smaller

Linking Characteristic 3: Collaboration

Linking Characteristic 4: Student centered

Assessment? Yes




Description of assessment: Historically, institutions have assessed their general education on their own initiative and done saw as a starting point for curriculum reform. However, politicians agencies, and associations are seeking to determine how well students are educated. Colleges and universities are being asked to determine what they think students should study and to demonstrate the extent such learning has taken place.

In the 1992 Washington Center, general Education Reform: Rhetoric and Reality, Marie Rosenwasser summarizes the assessment efforts of a number of colleges involved in general education reform. Among the colleges engaging in assessment of their general education are Ball State, Shoreline Community College, Emporia State University, and Miami University of Ohio

Resistances: Many of the resistances to New Wave Calculus are similar to the resistance to science reforms. Student culture is seen as a barrier as students often feel they are not being taught and are resentful and skeptical as a result. Faculty and students are both frustrated at times because these classes move more slowly than traditional classes. Specifically, there is a perception that students are not learning as much content as they should

Evolution/History: While the concern with general education and the core curriculum has a long history, the current focus on the core curriculum began in the late 1970s. The 1977 Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching report entitled Missions of the College Curriculum praised the achievements of the academic major and characterized general educat ion as "a disaster area." Criticisms of general education continued in the early 1980s. Specifically, A Nation at Risk, To Reclaim a Legacy, Involvement in Learning, and Integrity in the College Curriculum all identified significant problems in general education. Since this time, faculty and staff from the majority of American colleges and universities have engaged in discussions, seeking to identify constructive means for improving general education. Moreover, according to Gaff (1992, Washington Center), many colleges are engaged in reform efforts. However, this Gaff also contends that this is less obvious to the public.




Notes:

Major sources:
Gaff, J (1988). Reforming Undergraduate general Education. Liberal Education November/December.

Feldman, R (1988). Reforming general education. Liberal Education. November/December.

Washington Center (1992). General education reform: rhetoric and reality. Barbara Leigh Smith.

[Overview] [Guiding Questions] [Model Categories] [Project Description] [Project News] [Working Definitions] [Your Comments]

Return to Innovation Models Table of Contents