Spring 1991 - Digitized Resources Murphy Library University of ...

Goodbye Basic Studies
ew General Education Program prepa es students for changing world
hat should UW-L students know
when they graduate?
A pretty basic question that deserves a
good answer. But what is the answer? Is
there a common core of knowledge that
defines an "educated person?" Does a
UW-La Crosse education prepare students
to live in the world? Can improvements be
made in what we teach and how we teach
to ensure students are getting the best
possible education?
For the past 4Y2 years our faculty have
put this issue on the front burner by
conducting a serious, thorough review of
the Basic Studies Program. The result is a
major revision. This fall, the new General
Education Program will replace Basic
Studies. A new philosophy, set of courses,
list of requirements, and spectrum of
opportunities for all students come with
the change.
It was time for change
The impetus for change was both local
and national. The university Strategic
Planning Committee called for a review of
the program in 1986, pointing out that it
had been 25 years since any significant
examination of Basic Studies had been
undertaken. That call coincided with a
general, nationwide trend to review higher
education curriculums. The task fell to the
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee
(UCC).
That's how Bill Cerbin got involved. As a
committee member, Cerbin recalls that he
originally voted against a UCC review. His
side lost. As the UCC members took up
the issue, something interesting
happened.
"I began to see the review as an
opportunity to think about curriculum and
the purposes of a college education,"
remembers Cerbin, an associate professor
c:
.§ '"
'0
:t:
:.--. "" "7 '"
Vice Chancellor Carl Wimberly has played
major roles in the university's general education
programs for more than 30 years.
8 UW·l Alumnus Spring 1991
of psychology. "It was a little like an
evangelical conversion. I really began to
believe in general education as a centerpiece
of the undergraduate experience."
Since that initial exposure, Cerbin has
served on the ad hoc committee charged
with revising Basic Studies (the task became
too large for the UCC on top of its
other duties). Cerbin chaired the General
Education Committee established by the
Faculty Senate in 1988 to complete the
job.
Along the way, Cerbin has become an
expert on general education.
Committee members read widely about
higher education in general - and general
education programs in particular. "But we
also drew on our own experiences and on
our own undergraduate experiences,"
notes Cerbin. What they learned was
there's no one way to structure a general
education program.
They also discovered that it often takes
more time to change an existing program
than to start one from scratch.
It took the faculty less than a year to
propose and implement the Basic Studies
Program in 1961. When General Education
takes effect this fall, it will be after a 4V2
year process. "It's harder to change
something than to invent something new,"
explains Cerbin. "We had to overcome
concepts and procedures that have been
long accepted."
It also took the committee a long time
to come up with an acceptable rationale,
and a conceptual framework for the
revised program. According to Cerbin, that
was an essential first step.
"Historically, universities have not made
the case for general education -- institutions
have second-class status with no set
of goals or positive purposes," he says,
and points to our own stated purposes for
Basic Studies. The current catalog lists two
purposes: bring students into contact with
different disciplines, and to reduce the
pressure on entering students to choose a
major right away.
"That's not a good rationale, at least it's
not defined in a positive way. It's certainly
not very compelling," adds Cerbin,
"especially when we are trying to make
the case for why all students should go
through this program."
The general view, says Cerbin, is that
general education takes a back seat to a
student's major. Students have viewed
Basic Studies as a set of obstacles to get
past before they can do what they really
want to do. Cerbin hopes the new program
will be viewed less as an obstacle
and more as an opportunity.
Instead of a two sentence statement of
purpose, the new General Education Program
is supported by a two-page rationale
and a list of 10 well-defined goals. And
that, says Cerbin, provides general education
with the coherence and importance it
deserves.
------- - - - ----
The new program
Others agree that the philosophy behind
the new program sets it apart from the
current Basic Studies Program.
"The strength of General Education is in
the philosophy of the program," stressed
Linda Host. She chairs the Faculty Senate
which debated, revised and ratified the
new program. "It's a fundamental concept
of education from the 80s, a more moderr
idea of instructional practice."
The heart of that new philosophy is
inquiry-based instruction. All courses
accepted as part of the General Education
program are to be inquiry-based.
Inquiry-based courses promote students'
active participation in learning and
thinking about the ideas covered in the
courses. Students are not only to learn
subject matter, but also to develop the
1....-_--1"7
Linda Host
I/(General
Education)
is ... a
more
modern idea
c: of instructional
.§ '" practice." -H<
'0
:t:
'"
intellectual skills necessary to analyze,
evaluate and respond intelligently to concepts.
"They will engage in critical thinking and
reasoning in these courses," says Cerbin.
"We want to engage students, not just ask
them to memorize."
That's not to say that students don't
already do this in Basic Studies courses.
The new program simply adopts this
approach to teaching as the standard and
stresses, in clear and forceful language, the
importance of teaching critical thinking
skills.
After all, says Cerbin, those are the skills
that will allow students to respond with
judgment and wisdom to situations they
face after they graduate.
Despite the new thrust, much of the
new program is. familiar. "Alumni coming
back to campus would say the General
Education Program has the same feel as
Basic Studies," says Host, an associate
professor of mathematics. "They'd notice
differences, but it would certainly be
recognizable."
That's because the new program retains
the same structure and many of the same
course requirements as Basic Studies. But
General Education also emphasizes
several new areas.

Bill Cerbin an
associate professor
of psychology,
chaired the committee
that
revamped the
university's Basic
Studies Program.
long the way, he's
become an expert
on general education.
Vice Chancellor Carl Wimberly notes
three additions to the new program:
emphases on writing, multicultural education
and internationalizing the curriculum.
Wimberly not only helped initiate the
current review, he also played a major role
in the development of the Basic Studies
Program 30 years ago and helped initiate
the current review.
Writing, multicultural studies stressed
Good writing skills are essential for
communicating efectively and thinking
with care and precision. Recognizing this,
the General Education Program requires
all students to take two writing emphasis
courses. The courses require at least 50
pages of writing a semester, 10 of which
must be polished prose. Writing courses
are not the sole responsibility of the
English department. All disciplines are
being encouraged to offer writing emphasis
courses.
That's significant, according to
Wimberly. "Students will take it seriously
if everyone says writing is important.
They'll be more inclined to pay attention
to someone in their own field who requires
good writing skills."
Students will also take courses on
minority cultures and global issues. "A
major goal of the new program," says
Wimberly, "is to help students recognize
that this is one world and that college
graduates should have the tools that can
lead to greater international understanding."
The new program also calls on departments
to work together to develop cross
disciplinary courses. One example ready
to go next fall is a College of Health,
Physical Education and Recreation course
which replaces the one-credit physical
activities courses of Basic Studies. All
three departments in the college collaborated
to offer a three-credit course on
health and physical well being.
Cerbin hopes to see future collaborations
between departments. That's what
general education programs should be
about, he says, because although the
university is disciplinary, life is not. "And
we need to prepare students for life," he
stresses.
A stimulating experience
The debate over general education and
curriculum on campus has been stimulating
for those at the center of the
process as well as those less involved.
That should have a lasting effect.
A new General Education Committee
has been organized to make ongoing
recommendations for the program, to
keep it vital and adaptable.
"That should prevent the need for a
wrenching overhaul like this 25 years
Group discussions are part of the new inquiry-based courses that promote students' participation in
learning and thinking about ideas covered in the classes.
down the road," says Senate chair Host.
And it should keep faculty focused on the
important issues of higher education.
Cerbin predicts that the General Education
Committee has the potential to be
the most intellectually stimulating committee
on campus.
"1 was involved in a lot of intellectually
invigorating discussions with colleagues.
I'd even say it was fun," admits Cerbin.
Host concurs. She adds that the most
interesting part for her has been learning
about courses, subjects and faculty she
never gets to see. "I've gained a greater
appreciation for all the other units on
campus."
In addition, it's been an opportunity for
the entire faculty to rejuvenate and to get
excited once more about teaching,
especially teaching students who aren't
majors in their fields.
That can only benefit students.
"Because the most important component
of general education is the faculty who
teach," says Wimberly.
Stories by Kevin Bertelsen
A collaborative effort
At UW-La Crosse, the faculty controls the
curriculum. And our nearly 500 faculty
have had a lot to say about the proposed
changes in general education.
"After all," says Vice Chancellor Carl
Wimberly, "it's the only opportunity that
the faculty as a whole gets to provide
input on what is important for all students
to know."
That made for a lot of meetings. The
Faculty Senate debated the proposals
throughout the process, and the General
Education Committee held open hearings
and met with nearly every department.
The committee received and responded
to written communications. At time, says
committee chair Bill Cerbin, the group was
meeting twice a week in an effort to
understand faculty intentions.
"It would have been hard to increase
faculty involvement and still have gotten
the work done," says Cerbin.
Faculty intentions were at times difficult
to discern. "It was not easy to get a
concensus on this," explains Wimberly.
"What are the essentials? We were all over
the map on this."
"Let's face it, each department at a
university stakes out its own territory,"
add Cerbin." It's hard to put together a
unified curriculum that takes those territorial
claims into consideration."
Probably the main concern of faculty
members throughout the process was the
size of the program, its credit load.
According to linda Host, chair of the
Faculty Senate, that was a legitimate
concern. "The faculty wanted to insist that
students have a broad liberal arts education,
but they had to balance that against
the heavy credit loads for some majors,
especially those in the professional programs,"
he ays.
Compromises, she says, were made to
reduce the credit requirements to a level
acceptable to most faculty. A a result, the
new program will r quire approximately
the same number of credits a the old
Basic Studies Program.
Thus the General Education Program
taking effect this fall represents a true
compromise. It's the result of many revisions.
"It belongs to the entire faculty. No
one individual would have come up with
this specific program," says Cerbin.
That's not bad, says Cerbin, who feels
the program has the potential to distinguish
UW-L nationally.
"If we work hard to implement th
stated goals, this is as strong a program as
you will find anywhere," says Cerbin.
"A lot of colleges talk about general
education, and that's as far as they go,"
says Cerbin. "Our faculty, however, have
described what they will actually be doing
in the classroom. UW-L students will be
engaged in an exciting learning experience."
UW-L Alumnus Spring 1991 9