The final piece of Curriculum 2000's intricate puzzle was set May 6, when the Arts and Sciences Council approved the new writing program, which calls for a first-year writing experience and two subsequent writing in the discipline courses.
After heated debates over several amendments, the faculty representatives spent very little time discussing the scheme itself and approved it by a strong, but not unanimous, vote. The impassioned debate was reminiscent of several discussions during the Curriculum 2000 dialogues in December and January.
As they had done during the winter's meetings, representatives from the economics and zoology departments demanded an increase in faculty resources from the administration before they would vote for the writing proposal. They claimed that their relatively low faculty-to-majors ratios will prohibit them from offering enough resource-intensive upper-level writing classes for their majors.
"This is like the research requirement....," said Professor Marjorie McElroy, chair of the economics department. "I'm happy to do it if you put in the catalog, 'Don't expect to meet this in your major.'"
But writing task force member Steve Nowicki, associate professor of zoology, countered by saying that although writing in the disciplines courses outside the major are not ideal, they are better than the status quo. "Any effort we can make to increase the exposure of students to writing anywhere is a good step...," he said. "Having it in the major is unworkable at this point."
The council discussed an amendment submitted by Claudia Strauss, associate professor of the practice of cultural anthropology, which would have eliminated the preparatory course Academic Writing 19, placing all matriculants into AW 20.
Opponents of AW 19 fear the class would be viewed by students as remedial. Under the Strauss amendment, AW 20 instructors would refer students needing additional assistance to tutors.
Professor of Political Science Peter Fish worried the tutorial system would be unenforceable. "An effective referral system is lacking," he said. "There is no requirement that students use these resources."
Dean of Undergraduate Affairs Bob Thompson also responded to concerns that minorities and athletes would be overrepresented in AW 19 classes. For example, he said, Harvard, which has served as a model for the plan, found that a disproportionate number of football players enroll in AW 19. Given Duke's larger athletic program, Thompson said his task force would spend the coming year investigating the potential of this trend appearing at Duke. Given this stipulation, the council defeated the amendment.
Professor of Chemistry James Bonk proposed an amendment to Curriculum 2000 that would allow students to use one independent study course to fulfill both the writing and research competencies. The council unanimously passed the amendment, which Bonk hopes will be particularly helpful to science students.
Previously, students could use an independent study to satisfy the research competency only.
In other business: In response to a letter from Kristine Stiles, associate professor of art and art history, the council discussed the Duke Undergraduates Evaluate Teaching web site. Stiles wrote that faculty members should be able to choose whether to participate in the DUET program.
After much debate, including a discussion about whether requiring faculty consent would be a violation of students' free speech, two more motions were proposed.
One would remove grade distribution data from DUET and the other would discontinue the project until all the bugs are worked out.
Both motions will be considered when the council reconvenes in September.
Greg Pessin contributed to this story.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.