Abstract

General Education at Penn State, though effective in some ways, could improve tremendously from carefully implemented reforms.  Gen Ed classes should engage students’ interests in an environment that facilitates mental growth and development.  To successfully benefit the entire student body, the General Education system must cater to the goals and interests of each student.  A dynamic, personalized approach to Gen Ed coursework is needed to achieve a greater applicability to all students.  General Education is not intended to cause stress and a uniform experience for all students, but rather to encourage individualized student growth and exploration.

General Education Reform

The primary objective of General Education is to provide an opportunity for students to explore knowledge in a variety of disciplines, to discover unknown interests, and to develop communication skills.  Changing the current General Education system has great potential, as the current system is far from perfect.  However, the extent of which each student benefits from General Education depends heavily upon its applicability to each student’s unique interests and education goals.  Therefore, a flexible approach to General Education is the best option.  There should be two separate Gen Ed routes for incoming freshmen to select between, based upon their personal preference: exploration emphasis and skills emphasis.  A General Education system that focuses on theme would not be as beneficial to the entire student body.  In order to transform Generation Education into a more effective learning environment, some of the courses should be pass/fail.  English 15 and CAS 100 should remain separate courses as they are under the currently.  In order to improve upon the effectiveness of General Education, reforms should increase students’ interest in their classes by granting them flexibility regarding their course content.

Learning capacity is not directly correlated to the rigorousness of a course, but rather the students’ desire to learn the material presented to them.  An audience of students that is interested in the material of a specific course is naturally more inclined to retain and benefit from that material.  However, when considering Gen Ed reform, especially at a school as massive as Penn State, it is important to acknowledge that each student is entitled to his/her personal interests and educational goals.  Certain students have identified their goals and interests before college, while other students enter freshmen year unsure of their anticipated career path and eager to explore possibilities.  General education should benefit both groups of students by allowing flexibility.

Students who enroll at Penn State should have the option to follow a General Education system that focuses on exploration.  This option would benefit students who are undecided about their major or simply desire a broader understanding of the world.  An estimated 40% of students enter college undecided about their major, and approximately 75% of students change their major at least once before graduation. (http://dus.psu.edu/mentor/2013/06/disconnect-choosing-major/)  The exploration Gen Ed option should include a diverse array of courses, covering topics from a variety of disciplines. Students should possess the ability to select from these courses based on their personal preferences.  This would allow for students to engage in topics of their greatest interest, and thus offer the most effective learning experience for students who wish to explore.

An alternative, skill-based General Education structure should be offered as an alternative to the exploration option.  This skill Gen Ed system would benefit students who enroll at Penn State with distinct and definite education goals.  The courses should focus primarily on strengthening and developing skills that are required for living in the modern era.  Classes should include computer and modern technology-based content.  Because most students in the skills emphasis Gen Ed system would have an idea of their future career path, they could benefit by selecting skills classes to help with their specific degree.  There should be different skills Gen Ed classes for each college at Penn State.  For instance, students in the College of Engineering should take skills-based General Education courses in topics related to engineering, such as computer programming and using engineering equipment.  Whereas students enrolled in the Smeal College of Business who know their career plans can take different courses that support their specific goals, such as courses about using stock software or courses that develop skills with business writing.

Offering two discrete General Education paths, one exploration-based and one skills-based, benefits students by offering courses that are specific to each student’s needs.  This would effectively harness more student interest in the course material because the content would relate more directly to each individual student’s career goals.  Another way to increase student engagement in course material is to offer more pass/fail Gen Ed courses.  Many students select their Gen Ed classes strictly based upon the incentive to attain the highest grade possible.  This involves registering for classes with “easy A” professors and classes with and minimal coursework, regardless of the students’ interest in the content.  It also inherently encourages cheating, plagiarism, and other dishonest behavior as a means to receive an “A”.  Each of these shortcuts are detrimental to a healthy, effective learning environment.  Alternatively, if students do not obsess over their quantifiable grades in Gen Eds — classes that are designed to spark interest and engagement — they will focus more on gaining personal benefit from the classes.  This would likely result in more knowledge retention and a more pleasant and supportive learning environment.  A study conducted by Washington State University concluded that pass/fail classes, as an alternative to traditional GPA-based classes, serve many benefits for students.  Firstly, they lower stress and anxiety levels, allowing students to perform better in other classes.  Pass/fail classes also contribute to greater group cohesiveness, which is an important aspect of General Education. (http://facsen.wsu.edu/current_agenda/exhibits_092712_04113/mayo%20clinic%20full%20pharmacy.pdf)

Another General Education practice that needs reform to improve student cohesiveness is the current policy of capping the number of A’s that can be administered in a General Education class.  This policy is counterproductive to the the educational objectives of a learning institution.  Establishing that a certain quantity of student can receive A’s, regardless of the student body’s efforts and improvement throughout the semester, discourages students from striving for improvement.  It also creates a situation where students are competing against one another to attain the limited A’s.  This transforms a potentially cooperative, unified learning environment into a competitive situation.  Important student interactions of many classes, such as peer editing, is less mutually beneficial in an environment where students are competing for grades.  A’s should alternatively be delegated to students who earn them through effort, improvement, and knowledge of the course material, independent of the other students’ performances.

Another important aspect of General Education to facilitate learning is reiterating course material multiple times in different environments.  Combining English 15 and CAS 100 into one year-long class would counter this idea.  Though these classes have similar content, taking each class separately gives students more time to absorb the material.  Studies suggest that “distributed practice”, or spreading out study sessions rather than focusing on a set of topics for one long duration, improves content understanding. (http://ideas.time.com/2013/01/09/highlighting-is-a-waste-of-time-the-best-and-worst-learning-techniques/)  Also, the information would likely be presented to each student by two different professors with unique perspectives and teaching styles.  Thus, students can benefit more from two separate classes than one year-long combined class with a uniform teaching style and repetitive content.  Maintaining separate classes for English 15 and CAS 100 would also improve schedule flexibility, allowing students to construct their schedules in a more dynamic manner.

(Conclusion)

The primary objective of General Education is to provide an opportunity for students to explore knowledge in a variety of disciplines, to discover unknown interests, and to develop communication skills.  Administering changes to the current General Education system has great potential to improve upon it, as the current system is far from perfect.  However, the extent of which each student benefits from General Education depends heavily upon its applicability to each student’s unique interests and education goals.  I thereby believe that a flexible approach to General Education is the best option.

 There should be two separate Gen Ed routes for incoming freshmen to select based on their personal preference: exploration emphasis and skills emphasis.  The exploration option should be more catered toward students who are unsure of what degree to pursue, or simply desire to attain a broader understanding of the world.  Whereas the skillsoption  would more directly benefit students who know the goals of their education at Penn State and wish to improve upon skills that can build a foundation for the field that they are pursuing.  The skills courses would be focused around modern standards of many employers, such as computer skills, media communication skills, etc.  Both the exploration and skills options have flexible courses to cater to each student’s individual preferences.