Intellectual climate in our hands

Last week, Duke Student Government both approved and assembled a pair of committees to examine intellectual culture and curriculum at Duke. These student-led committees are charged with the task of examining the issues that Duke’s intellectual climate—or lack thereof—presents the University.

The formation of the committees raises the question of what type of intellectual environment Duke provides for its students in the classroom and how students carry that environment into broader campus life. As we see it, Duke’s intellectual culture thrives more than many may acknowledge. Although without a doubt the “work hard, play hard” attitude pervades campus, Duke students do not so starkly divide their academic and social lives that intellectualism ends at the doors of classroom buildings.

The notion of intellectual climate is a nebulous one. As DSG Vice President for Academic Affairs Kaveh Danesh, a junior, has admitted, this issue is not one that can easily be tackled. The DSG committees have a difficult task ahead, and in fact, their members are likely to find many obstacles in their efforts to address such abstract problems of campus culture.

Still, because academic affairs has determined that it will make an effort to research and ultimately improve Duke’s intellectual climate, we believe that committee needs to take certain steps in order to do so with any success.

First and most importantly, faculty must play a key role in this committee. Ultimately, students’ educational experience finds its roots in the classroom, and professors can make basic changes to class structure in order to promote continued discussion and thought about subject material in students’ free time. Engaging faculty in the discussion on intellectual culture is the first and most important step toward enhancing it.

In the same vein, DSG has stated its intention to reassess Curriculum 2000. This measure will be an important one in changing the classroom dynamic at Duke. At present, the curriculum sets forth broad requirements, such as “small group learning experiences,” that, by their vague nature, do not necessarily bolster intellectual climate on campus. Rethinking curriculum structure is necessary in a reassessment of Duke’s intellectual climate.

Finally, the committee must examine the plethora of factors that can influence campus culture, including the diversity of experiences of the student body. For example, the differences between the academic experiences of Pratt School of Engineering and Trinity College students cannot be neglected. Only when the committee understands the University holistically can it begin to explore measures for improving intellectual culture.

With a thorough understanding of the academic experience, the committee should look to other aspects of the Duke experience, such as extracurricular activities and residence life, as outlets for fostering stronger intellectualism outside of the classroom.