Re: Letter to the Editor
- Sophia Harris
- Apr 18
- 2 min read
Updated: Apr 19
We appreciate the General Education Advisory Board's detailed response to our April 11 editorial regarding the proposed General Education (GenEd) model and Dr. Patricia Lynne’s correspondence with The Gatepost regarding projected enrollment in Arts & Humanities general education courses, should it pass.
However, we remain concerned about the lack of clarity around key components of the proposed GenEd model.
At last week’s University Curriculum Committee (UCC) meeting, for example, there was still debate regarding whether World Languages will be included in the GenEd core. If World Languages is excluded, then the projected enrollment calculations for Arts & Humanities GenEd courses are directly impacted.
Another example: at the April 11 meeting, it was suggested that Philosophy classes would also be part of Arts & Humanities under the new model.
This means students will be asked to choose to take only two courses from an even wider array of humanities options. There is no guidance as to what students should take, which is concerning because there is such an extreme range of possibilities.
Framingham State simply does not have enough students for all the classes on this expanded list of humanities GenEd courses to run.
Similarly, the structure and function of the proposed “overlays” have yet to be discussed. It has not yet been determined what the overlays will be or whether students will be allowed to satisfy them through their majors or minors. At this point, the model is significantly underdeveloped.
As we said in last week's editorial, The Gatepost editorial board believes areas such as civic literacy, creative expression, and quantitative reasoning are not just academic categories - they are cornerstones of a 21st-century curriculum that develops well-rounded, engaged, and informed students and citizens.
We must respectfully disagree that a GenEd system should simply provide a menu of choices without articulating values or priorities. We hope the ongoing revision process will truly support students and reflect the values of the institution.
Sophia Harris
Editor-in-Chief