Letter to the Editor: Distribution requirements should be reduced to nothing
To the Editor:
As the faculty
I have yet to genuinely invest in a distribution class. Instead, these courses are annoying hoops I jump through on the way to a worthier goal. I attend class based on the recommendation of a Magic 8 Ball I keep on my desk – ostensibly earning only 12 out of the 24 required credits measured in terms of attendance. I don’t take my assignments for these classes seriously because of the pass/fail
Few of my distribution courses have enriched my education, and many of them have unfairly burdened professors with disinterested students. Conversely, in courses outside my major (many of which should grant distribution credit yet do not), I have poured my heart and soul into essays, dug into material outside of class, and repeatedly visited with professors during office hours, developing valuable relationships and intellectual vibrancy.
I understand that allowing students to set their own curriculum requirements is anathema to many professors. However, I posit that we already do exactly this, regardless of graduation requirements, simply by modulating the time and energy we invest into our courses.
I fully encourage graduation requirements that require exploration. But if you limit my selection to a narrow range of topics I find uninteresting (from my conversations with peers I am far from alone in this opinion), please do not make the mistake of equating course completion with achieving a broad and meaningful education.
Alex Hayes, Baker College ’18
More from The Rice Thresher
“Even at this reduced risk, students and their parents need to know that the campus will not be safe, and the risk to health and lives should be evaluated against potential benefits. Therefore, it is worth examining what these benefits are,“ writes Professor Moshe Vardi.
“[Calls] to remove Rice’s statue are problematic and should be rejected. They present a false view that we should not commemorate a historical figure who has made valuable contributions to society because this person had moral flaws,“ writes Jacob Saldinger (Sid Richardson ‘16).
“When we talk about a “return” to campus, we must be clear that it is not in any sense a return... The classroom to which about half the faculty has agreed to return will not be the classroom we left in March,“ writes English professor Helena Michie.