by Robyn Keyster

Created on: November 17, 2009   Last Updated: November 18, 2009

At most U.S. colleges, universities, and community colleges, all students are required to take about two years' worth of "core" classes. These courses focus on the basics: math, science, english, the humanities, the social sciences, and the arts. With the noble intent of producing well-rounded citizens, these courses nevertheless perform the ignoble task of soaking up tons of time and money. With college costing more than ever, and with fewer and fewer students graduating within four years, the notion of the collegiate core curriculum has recently come under deservedly close scrutiny.

When one examines the purpose of the core curriculum - to mass-produce a competent, engaged citizenry - one can't help but notice that public education in general shares that same purpose. High schools in particular aim to create knowledgeable, productive members of society. As a result, high school curriculums can make the college core seem a bit redundant. The classes are often the same; many a student has drawn-upon their high school notes for college-level core classes. Since the courses are often identical, savvy high-schoolers can "test out" of repeating the same content over and over (via the AP and IB programs). Due to this repetition of content, the classes within most core curriculums have simply already been taken.

Reflecting the needs of a diverse society, many core courses focus on opening minds and increasing tolerance. While this is a worthy goal, students are more receptive to influence during their younger years. Just as young people more easily grasp foreign languagues and some forms of mathematics, adolescents and teens are more easily able to develop a tolerant attitude. Courses on respect for other cultures, tolerance for various faiths, and similar subjects will thus function more effectively on high-schoolers, instead of those who have had years to form rigid opinions. High schools also tend to be more diverse than colleges, and thus serve as a more useful backdrop to lessons on tolerance.

In addition to the role of the high school as a more appropriate venue for the core curriculum, today's economic realities further lessen the need for the core. Thanks in no small part to technology and outsourcing, employers today have a pressing need for highly-skilled specialists. Anyone can put forth a little effort at a lot of things to proclaim themselves "well-rounded," but what employers want are do-ers, not dilettantes. While it may be nice to take a class or two for fun, students would be wise to make themselves as marketable as possible to future employers. Unfortunately, core curriculums tend to take up time that could be better spent mastering key skills, or developing specialized areas of expertise.

As today's world is changing so rapidly, core curriculums would prove more useful if their courses actually met students' future needs. Practical courses, on topics such as financial literacy or civic engagement, would likely benefit students more than a seemingly random humanities or arts course.

By either altering or shortening their core curriculums, colleges can better themselves by becoming more student-oriented. Of course, both public and private schools are obliged to the community to produce active workers and citizens. Still, they're also obliged to students to give them the skills necessary to become such workers and citizens.

Learn more about this author, Robyn Keyster.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.