The Observer, February 22, 2008
Volume XL, Issue 18
Engineering faculty proposes change to SAGES curriculum
Future freshmen classes might be able to get out of some SAGES seminars – if they're engineers.
The faculty of the Case School of Engineering has unanimously approved a motion that, if passed, would provide an alternative to SAGES for engineering majors. Instead of the two university seminars, students would be able to choose a combination of six humanities and social sciences courses.
For depth, at least three of the courses have to be in one subject area. Two must be in the complementary area for breadth. For example, if a student chooses a depth sequence in the humanities, the breadth courses must be taken in the social sciences. The sixth course could be in either area.
To ensure writing proficiency, engineering students would still be required to submit a portfolio of essays from the first semester and the capstone seminar.
The undergraduate curriculum committee of the University Undergraduate Faculty (UUF) is currently debating the proposal. If approved, the motion will go to the executive committee of UUF, then will be voted on by the entire UUF, and then will be considered by the Faculty Senate. The final decision will be up to the president and the Board of Trustees.
"It is extremely unlikely that it would even affect the next incoming class," said Peter Whiting, director of SAGES.
John Blackwell, chair of the Ad Hoc Committee for SAGES in the engineering school, said that the idea for the proposal came fairly early on. The committee met throughout 2006 and 2007 to assess student reactions to the SAGES program, which were mixed.
The main purpose of the motion is to increase the flexibility available to engineering students. Typically, an engineering major requires close to 130 credit hours of coursework, leaving little time to take classes in the humanities and social sciences. The SAGES university seminars, which are intended to give breadth to a person's education, take up two of the available slots.
"Frankly, taking university seminars is only one way of getting that breadth," said Blackwell. The change would also make it much easier for engineering students to pursue a minor.
Blackwell emphasized that the engineering school is not pulling out of SAGES. Students would still be required to complete the first seminar and the capstone seminar; only the university seminars would become optional.
"I think the seminar approach has some advantages," he said. "We tend to exaggerate how much students learn in lecture classes."
CSE faculty are also pushing the change because of the great number of university seminars taught by people other than tenure-track faculty. In 2006-07, these people taught approximately 62 percent of the university seminars. The CSE vote to require SAGES was based on the assumption that only about 20 percent of seminars would be taught by distinguished community members.
"We thought that students would learn what it means to be at a research university," said Blackwell.
According to Whiting, the percentage is different than expected because of the large increase in student enrollment over the past few years.
"We have roughly 30 percent more students, so we need that many more seminars," he said. "The faculty size hasn't grown. The percent [of university seminars taught by tenure track faculty] will increase when we can hire more regular faculty."
SAGES was fully implemented in the fall of 2005, establishing a common set of general education requirements for all undergraduate majors. The CSE motion would jeopardize several of its intended advantages, said Whiting.
"When you start to create different requirements, it makes it harder to advise students," he said. "It makes it harder to change majors. It makes it harder to speak generally about what is a Case Western Reserve University education to prospective students and their parents and employers."
Anne Walker, a junior macromolecular science and engineering major, said that she would have liked to have such an option.
"It's kind of a shame that we spent so much money on the seminars just to make them optional for some students," she said. "At the same time, I know that a lot of people don't think they've benefited from the program. I don't feel like it will matter to the engineering students' education."
Michael Kowalski, a junior chemistry and biology major, said that the whole SAGES program needs modification.
"It's a bad temporary fix for a flawed system," he said, adding that it would be better to keep the first seminar and one university seminar, then integrate departmental seminars into classes that are already required for the major.
The proposed change will likely be under discussion for a long time.
"Many of our faculty from different schools are aiming to do what they believe is best for their students," said Whiting. "My concern and hope is that we do what's best for all of our students."
