Many Amherst students, and I can definitely say many freshmen, aren't sure what they want to study; as an underclassman it is a privilege to simply know what one would love to study. And here is the crux of the matter: At what point should the administration hand over the construction of a student's education to the student? When can it be said that a broad knowledge has been achieved and that it is now possible for more specialized learning to begin? I believe that Amherst's choice not to have a core curriculum is a benefit for both the students and their professors.
The ability to choose one's own courses gives students the freedom to learn more about what they are interested in and keeps them from simply following mandated requirements. This course selection encourages students to reflect upon their true interests and what they want to get out of college. High school was all about learning the things one had to know; college should be about learning the things one wants to know. The open course structure at Amherst allows for the type of experimentation that should occur at the collegiate level. One enters college with a good deal of general knowledge and a slight familiarity with specifics. Throughout four years at Amherst, a student should be able to expand this general knowledge while delving deeper into his or her specific interests.
In this respect, a certain degree of diversity in one's class selection becomes of great importance. As everyone knows, a course load consisting of only humanities courses will mean lots of reading and writing, while sticking solely to math and science will mean endless problem sets and labs. The best way to avoid an overabundance of any one type of work, which can become extremely tedious, is to study in a few different fields. Finding courses that adhere to one's topic of concentration and then adding a course or two that push one outside of the comfort zone creates a balance of interest and exploration that can only be found in a loosely defined course environment such as the one here at Amherst.
I have heard from many upperclassmen that the principle is great, but that the really good courses are the advanced ones-ones that have prerequisites. In a system where the ultimate goal is still a coherent major, this is an unavoidable obstacle. However, I don't think that it is too big of a problem; by taking one of the lower level introductory classes, a student can get a good feel for the topic or field and will be able to tell if it is worth pursuing in subsequent semesters. There are many courses that have no prerequisites and provide interesting insight into a diverse range of subjects. Many departments even have courses specifically designed for non-majors looking to broaden their horizons. As a result, students are easily able to take a broad spectrum of courses.
Amherst's absence of a core curriculum is mainly criticized for the very thing for which it is simultaneously praised: its freedom. It is easy to see how a student can get lost or off-track in a system without definitive, universal guidelines. In response to this problem Amherst has embraced the advising system. This system is the only thing standing between the Amherst student and a vast field of academic choices, choices which at times can be overwhelming. This advising system is very important, especially to freshman, who, despite what many say, are essentially clueless. This year Amherst expanded its advising program to include two student-advisor meetings before the year even began in order to give freshmen the opportunity to discuss first semester course choices with their advisors. In the future I think it is important for these advisors to play an even larger role in the students' course selection, especially in the early years.
Despite this possible stumbling block, I believe that any drawbacks resulting from an unstructured curriculum are outweighed by the advantages. Professors get students in their classes who actually want to be there. The productivity of the learning environment corresponds directly to the students' degree of interest in the topic, so having students who are interested in the class material is imperative to having a productive class. Furthermore, an interested class is more likely to be an engaged class, one that will listen and learn rather than simply sit through the class hour. Personal interest can never be overrated; genuine interest prompts participation and hard work. It also stimulates students to think more analytically and participate in class discussion.
While the hours of class and studying can take a toll on students, it is widely acknowledged that it is easier to focus on something one enjoys rather than on something that has been forced upon one "for one's own good." Much can be said for the "for your own good" theory, but by the time they are in college, students themselves should be able to discern what constitutes this good. Amherst's open curriculum gives students an opportunity to broaden their horizons while simultaneously pursuing their own interests. It provides students with the freedom to choose not just what they want to study but also how they want to spend the next four years of their lives.
Ball can be reached at jball09@amherst.edu