I was reading Monday’s Forum in Student Life when I found an article which truly hit home with me. Christian’s article arguing against distribution requirements reminds me of my hard time with the system. Specifically, I feel that the cluster system is unfair to transfer students and biased against certain majors.

As a junior transfer student who just arrived this year, I had the distinct pleasure of realizing that my schedule for the next two years would be dictated by the cluster system. Granted, I opted to finish two majors in mathematics and physics, but I was hoping that some of the distribution requirements that I had from my previous school would have let me focus almost solely on my majors. Unfortunately, I was hit with a barbed wire fence when it came to transferring credits into the cluster system.

As a junior, I am allowed to waive up to two clusters, but only at the approval of the Arts & Sciences deans (or whomever determines this sort of thing). I was able to waive the textual and historical studies cluster, but the administration did not give me any other clusters. Why? Although I had taken three semesters of a required seminar, which was a hybrid English/textual and historical studies system, I only had one semester each of musical composition, French and Gospel music; the last class specifically for cultural diversity (another requirement that cannot be waived). Since these classes are not in a strict, dictated, Wash. U. approved sequence, I was only able to waive one cluster.

Also, in the infinite wisdom that the system contains, I was able to waive my quantitative analysis course. I was very grateful that this was waived since almost every one of my math classes contains that label, and who knows what I would have done if I had to take another class for my major? Furthermore, this system does not allow people to waive the extra three credits required for each area on top of the cluster. So, as an incoming junior, I am set up to take three language and arts classes, three social sciences, another in textual and historical studies, one social differentiation course and a cultural diversity class. Using clever scheduling, I was able to reduce this to seven to eight courses (assuming no scheduling conflicts, another story entirely), which will require a large chunk of my time, given that I also have to complete two majors.

As I mentioned earlier, this system is also set up to help out certain majors and shun others. I wish I could be an East Asian Studies major since that would get me out of two clusters (TH and LA), whereas a Math and Physics major can only fall into the natural sciences division. As a Psychology major and French minor, I would be done with everything! Why is it that someone who happens to enjoy a major with two cluster headings is allowed to take fewer requirements than a student taking two majors with the same cluster heading, especially when the double major would need more leeway to schedule his/her major classes? In short, this system doesn’t make any sense and should be revised heavily. I am all for a balanced education, but at least make the system fair and balanced and with enough leeway to forgive perceived offenses such as an English major not finishing his writing intensive requirement.

Jared is a junior in Arts & Sciences. He can be reached via e-mail at [email protected].

Popularity: 1% [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 30th, 2008 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Forum. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.