Crediting Duke's curriculum changes

Until last Thursday, students were required to take 17 Duke courses out of their 34 total courses for graduation. That requirement will be increased to 24 in a new measure approved by the Arts and Sciences Council.

For a number of reasons, the board is in support of increasing the requirement for Duke credits. First, the increase helps maintain the integrity of a Duke degree. In providing a significant majority of the courses taken to graduate, Duke will have far more ability to control both the quality of the courses provided and the structure through which students must plan their education. The second benefit we see is in strengthening Duke as a communal enterprise. Taking courses together connects students, fostering an environment conducive to discussion and projects that can improve learning experiences and research on campus.

According to Suzanne Shanahan, chair of the Curriculum Committee and acting director of the Kenan Institute for Ethics, the argument on Duke-based course requirements is over “not how many non-Duke courses should students be allowed to take, but really, how many Duke courses constitute a Duke degree.” By increasing the Duke credits requirement, Duke has given itself room to more effectively provide quality on-campus education to its students. However, the recently approved change also sets restrictions on where non-Duke credits can be earned that, in fact, hinder this objective by restricting students from seeking out an educational path that best suits them.

As part of the new system, the number of courses taken at North Carolina state schools has been limited to four, down from eight. In many cases, a Duke student’s learning experience may be greatly enhanced by courses at nearby colleges, and a tight restriction on students’ ability to do so is detrimental. Duke offers a diverse selection of classes, but it cannot fulfill the needs and interests of each of its students, who , in turn, should be able to supplement and enhance their Duke education with classes from quality programs at nearby state schools. For example, a student interested in studying journalism—which is not offered curricularly in great depth—may benefit greatly from being able to take classes at the University of North Carolina School of Journalism. Each student’s interests and knowledge are different, and, as such, each student should be given independence to shape their own educational path to meet their needs in these final 10 courses.

In this way, we commend the change to increase the number of online courses allowed to one per semester. Online courses can provide an option for students to take courses they otherwise may not have the opportunity to take, especially for physical barriers. While we have warned in the past of the possible dangers in online courses, we nonetheless see the benefit they can provide in allowing students to personalize and maximize their education while on campus.

To be sure, there can be issues with allowing students increased freedom in their allotted 10 non-Duke courses. Students may intentionally take “easy” online courses, for example, to fulfill their graduation requirements. Yet, such problems are better solved on a case-to-case basis, and departments should be allowed to develop and maintain policies that place limits regarding specific courses and tracks. The increase in required Duke credits will positively impact the Duke educational experience, but placing broad, school-wide restrictions on the final 10 credits will serve only to hinder students.