2008 Woodie Awards
Core reform lacks representation
Issue date: 9/20/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
It is time, at last, for the University to review and revise the core curriculum. This seems to be a well-timed and very important undertaking, but there are still a number of unanswered questions regarding the process.
This first entails just what sort of reforms are to be expected. There has been talk, for years now, about reducing the 24-hour philosophy and theology minimum that is included as part of the requirement to receive a bachelor's degree from UST. While some say that the University's founding is based on such a core, it is hard to deny the fact that that idea may now be outdated.
Maintaining such a heavy influence on the Catholic-centered theological element of the University assumes that UST is a school comprised solely of students who are of the Catholic faith. In fact, according to the recently released 12th day report, the number of Catholic students has decreased by 20 percent since 2002.
Doesn't it seem that, out of simple regard to the whole of the student body, non-Catholic students should not be required to take 12 hours of primarily Catholicism-centered theology courses? Students who are interested in learning more about the Catholic faith should be accommodated in doing so by the offering of Catholicism-based electives; however, making them a requirement seems unbalanced. Students of other faiths should be able to further their spirituality in the same way, not by taking classes like "Teachings of the Catholic Church."
To free up some of those required hours would allow students to focus more on receiving a liberal arts education, perhaps completing a minor or double-majoring.
Some concern has also been expressed about the fact that every member of the core reform board is Catholic. This semester's undergraduate student body is 52 percent Catholic. At a University where only a little over half of the students are of one particular religious preference, it seems that fair representation should be given to the non-Catholics, as well. It is clear that Catholicism is barely the majority now. Should the reformation board not have non-Catholic members to represent that 48 percent of the student body that might prefer a core without course requirements specifically tailored to Catholic doctrine?
The idea is simple: UST accepts and receives tuition from people of all faiths. Decisions regarding the educational well being of students, especially when decisions regarding religious education are concerned, should be made to benefit all of the student body and not just a small majority. In order to ensure that everyone is fairly represented, the board needs to have non-Catholic members, as well.
-----------------------------------------------------
Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the Cauldron editorial staff. All other columns and opinion pieces represent solely the opinion of the author.
This first entails just what sort of reforms are to be expected. There has been talk, for years now, about reducing the 24-hour philosophy and theology minimum that is included as part of the requirement to receive a bachelor's degree from UST. While some say that the University's founding is based on such a core, it is hard to deny the fact that that idea may now be outdated.
Maintaining such a heavy influence on the Catholic-centered theological element of the University assumes that UST is a school comprised solely of students who are of the Catholic faith. In fact, according to the recently released 12th day report, the number of Catholic students has decreased by 20 percent since 2002.
Doesn't it seem that, out of simple regard to the whole of the student body, non-Catholic students should not be required to take 12 hours of primarily Catholicism-centered theology courses? Students who are interested in learning more about the Catholic faith should be accommodated in doing so by the offering of Catholicism-based electives; however, making them a requirement seems unbalanced. Students of other faiths should be able to further their spirituality in the same way, not by taking classes like "Teachings of the Catholic Church."
To free up some of those required hours would allow students to focus more on receiving a liberal arts education, perhaps completing a minor or double-majoring.
Some concern has also been expressed about the fact that every member of the core reform board is Catholic. This semester's undergraduate student body is 52 percent Catholic. At a University where only a little over half of the students are of one particular religious preference, it seems that fair representation should be given to the non-Catholics, as well. It is clear that Catholicism is barely the majority now. Should the reformation board not have non-Catholic members to represent that 48 percent of the student body that might prefer a core without course requirements specifically tailored to Catholic doctrine?
The idea is simple: UST accepts and receives tuition from people of all faiths. Decisions regarding the educational well being of students, especially when decisions regarding religious education are concerned, should be made to benefit all of the student body and not just a small majority. In order to ensure that everyone is fairly represented, the board needs to have non-Catholic members, as well.
-----------------------------------------------------
Unsigned editorials represent the majority opinion of the Cauldron editorial staff. All other columns and opinion pieces represent solely the opinion of the author.