Lily Huynh / The Cougar
UH has proposed to remove 101 courses from the core curriculum, according to documents obtained and verified by The Cougar. The proposed cuts represent a nearly 35% decrease of core courses and will go before the Board of Regents for approval at its meeting on Aug. 20.
Faculty and students alike have raised concerns about the effects of the proposed cuts, as well as the review process itself.
A working group of nine faculty members, each representing a different college, was responsible for assembling a report on the recommended changes to the core curriculum, which was sent to faculty on July 7 by Provost Diane Z. Chase.
According to a source familiar with the Core Curriculum Working Group, faculty in the Working Group had little autonomy when it came to evaluating courses; the process was constrained and largely guided by the requirements of Senate Bill 37, which establishes four criteria that core courses must meet.
Under SB 37, core curricula must be:
- Foundational and fundamental to a sound postsecondary education
- Necessary to prepare students for professional and civic life
- Capable of equipping students to participate in the workforce and improve society.
- Capable of ensuring a breadth of knowledge consistent with accreditation standard.
Faculty have voiced discontent about both the criteria themselves and UH’s interpretation of the SB 37 framework
Classical Studies Associate Professor Richard Armstrong emphasizes that courses across a range of disciplines and topics can be considered ‘foundational’. He is similarly bothered by the term ‘workforce’, which he says is vague and neglects to consider that in Houston, culture is a major part of work.
As for the fourth criterion, Armstrong points out that all courses have to be part of the accreditation standard, regardless of whether they are in the core. Shrinking the core, he argues, is also counterproductive to promoting a breadth of knowledge.
“I advocate strongly that students ought to be able to choose among a wide array of options what is foundational to them,” Armstrong said. “Why are we doing this? For the students? Why are we taking away options from the students?”
On July 20, the UH chapter of American Association of University Professors sent a letter to the University administration and the members of the Core Curriculum Working Group. Among several major concerns listed, including a lack of transparency and denial of broader faculty participation in the review process, the letter points out issues with the application of SB 37.
UH required individual courses to satisfy all four SB 37 criteria to qualify as a core course, but the UH AAUP chapter argues that the SB 37 framework can apply to the core curriculum as a whole.
“I think that one can read and interpret SB 37 in ways that are either narrow or broad,” said Hugh Roy and Lillie Cranz Cullen Distinguished Professor Roberto Tejada. “And my understanding is that the application of these principles onto the curriculum are not about each particular course, but about the entire core curriculum as being foundational and fundamental in serving the civic responsibility and producing civic citizenship among our students.”
The review process has also been criticized as opaque; outside of the professors selected to be part of the Core Curriculum Working Group, the broader faculty were largely left out of the decision-making process.
“I understand and I trust my colleagues who were involved in making those decisions, but I also feel that a body of nine professors is not sufficient to really represent the variety of knowledge production and courses that we offer in the humanities,” Tejada said.
The faculty members in the Working Group were not permitted to speak with other faculty or the media about their work, which Armstrong says is extremely unusual.
Then, when the report came out, Armstrong found that of six Classical Studies courses that were previously in the core, five were proposed to be cut.
“I did not see that coming. We all knew politically there could be courses on climate change or LGBTQ history or women’s studies that might be targeted as politically problematic,” Armstrong said. “But if they’re cutting five out of six core courses in classical studies, that’s pretty radical.”
Armstrong filled out a faculty input form provided by the provost, but he doesn’t know who will read his response or what the appeal process will look like.
Physics Instructional Professor Rebecca Forrest faces the same uncertainty; her course, “PHYS 3313, ‘Advanced Laboratory I”, is on the list of proposed cuts. Though she also submitted the input form, she says the previous level of interaction and cooperation between faculty and the administration appears to have disappeared, perhaps because SB 37 also led to the dissolution of the Faculty Senate.
Previously, the Faculty Senate would have been the forum in which curriculum changes were discussed among various faculty members, department chairs and colleges.
“In the old days, there would be a faculty senate, there would be processes, but now there’s just this mysterious committee, courses are rejected or not, maybe we can appeal, but it’s not clear and the rationale is unknown,” Armstrong said. “That’s what makes the faculty angry, because it feels like it’s arbitrary.”
Another flaw that faculty have pointed out in the core review process is its timing: the Working Group started meeting in late May and concluded by July 1. During the summer, rather than teaching, most faculty are focused on research, with some even doing work abroad. The fact that the proposed cuts were announced in July, Armstrong said, looks suspicious.
“It’s like they really don’t want our input because they’re going to do this while nobody’s here,” Armstrong said. “That doesn’t create a feeling of goodwill.”
Also in contention is the topic of the courses that may be cut. English Associate Professor David Mazella says the proposed cuts seem to disproportionately target humanities courses, as well as fields like LGBTQ+ and women’s studies.
“Introduction to Women’s Studies” and “Introduction to LGBT Studies” are both among the proposed cuts. Although introductory courses like “Intro to African American Studies” or “Cultures of India” will remain in the core, their upper-level counterparts are under consideration to be removed.
“It’s irritating enough when it happens in the humanities, but it’s also going after the visibility of queer people, of Asian Americans, Latinos, African Americans,” Mazella said. “It’s just tamping down their visibility to find themselves in the curriculum, which is, in fact, crucial to people’s ability to navigate college.”
But at the heart of the controversy surrounding the proposed cuts is their anticipated impacts on students.
A smaller core curriculum, implemented as UH breaks records for undergraduate enrollment, could mean the courses that remain in the core balloon in enrollment. Students could find themselves in classes that number in the mid to upper hundreds.
And with reduced choices at their disposal, students’ graduation may be delayed as they wait for a spot to open up in a core course that fulfills their degree requirements.
“The core is going to become unpleasant for students if they have fewer options and the enrollments are out the door,” Armstrong said. “The other problem is while every year, the last couple years, we’re increasing enrollment, we’ve taken major classroom buildings offline. So more students, less classroom space, fewer options for core.”
Student Government Association President Tav Cockrell and Vice President Ian Kariuki have both issued statements on the proposed cuts via their social media accounts.
Cockrell voiced concerns about future enrollment, the sustainability of programs affected by the cuts and the breadth of educational opportunities available to UH students.
“To me, the Core Curriculum has always represented something larger than a checklist of graduation requirements,” Cockrell wrote. “It is an opportunity to explore unfamiliar disciplines, develop new ways of thinking and engage with perspectives outside of our own. I believe those experiences are fundamental to higher education and to preparing students not only for careers, but for thoughtful participation in their communities and in the world around them.”
Kariuki also pointed out the importance of maintaining a diverse curriculum that features different cultures and the complexity of American history.
“The University of Houston has always been defined by diversity,” Kariuki wrote. “That diversity is our greatest strength and our curriculum must reflect it.”
Ultimately, Mazella says he believes that the core curriculum review process is taking place in good faith; as a public state institution, UH is required to comply with SB 37. But he’s skeptical that a “lily-white” curriculum can effectively serve the University’s majority-minority student body.
“UH has tried to work as best it can between faculty, administrators, students and legislators,” Mazella said. “I don’t doubt their efforts, but the thing that I am most concerned about in the handling of this is that a lot of stuff just comes from right-wing talking points. Those are lies, and we’re building policy on the example of lies on this basis as a pretext.”
news@thedailycougar.com
