Reply to comment

 I feel that the mission statement and the academic requirements fit together perfectly as they are now. The academic requirements, while seemingly restrictive, actually exemplify a portion of Bryn Mawr’s mission statement (“we believe that only through considering many perspectives do we gain a deeper understanding of each other and the world”).  I also believe that having academic requirements in such structured areas as “Quantitative Studies”, “Social Sciences”, “Humanities”, etc. coalesces with Bryn Mawr’s rigorous academic schedule, but also demonstrates the school’s interest in creativity by allowing for the definitions of these requirements to be stretched to include classes not typically thought of belonging to those subjects (e.g. “The Stuff of Art” is an art history class viewed through the lens of chemistry—technically it belongs in the Natural Science division, but it also involves art history elements).  By allowing students to pick their own classes, I think that people become academically myopic, but having too much structure reduces their happiness and intellectual exploration. I think Bryn Mawr has the right idea of having requirements for general fields of study, but also allowing for creativity and a mercurial nature to the academic atmosphere of the classes offered.

As for the new requirements handed out on Tuesday, November 17, I don’t think they add anything different or innovative to the current curriculum.  In fact, I felt more confused than enlightened by them.  I felt that the terms used to describe the requirements were vague, and I also felt a little patronized by them.  Perhaps it was just the wording, but I couldn’t shake the sense that the college was beginning to cater more to making students happy with simplicity and a lessened workload. I think eliminating the two-class requirement for the Divisional Requirements dishonors Bryn Mawr’s mission statement concerning a “rigorous education”, and I also believe that it does a disservice to preparing students for life and work.  I believe having to take two courses in the flexible academic requirements creates students into well-rounded people with a thorough grasp on areas of study. While dispensing with the two-course requirement might foster independence, an element of Bryn Mawr’s mission statement, it could also do the complete opposite. By making students specialized in a certain area, the new requirements would make students unable to be independent due to their lack of knowledge on an area of study outside of their specialty.  The Divisional Requirements assure that all students have a firm base of knowledge in every general area to allow students to be independent and self-sufficient.

To wrap this up, I came to Bryn Mawr because of its current curriculum. Changing the curriculum would be a big disappointment to me, even though the requirements would still apply to me for the remaining three years. Still, I feel that the requirements are one of the top aspects of Bryn Mawr that makes it stand out as an individual among a dozen cookie-cutter liberal arts colleges.