Curriculum Conundrum Analysis

1313 Words6 Pages
The Core Curriculum Conundrum
The United States has hundreds of Universities, each with their own self-proclaimed “strengths.” Amongst the engineering, military, and art schools stands a branch of institutions whose aim is exactly the opposite of this. Liberal arts institutions pride themselves on not being strong only in one specific area but rather a broad spectrum of disciplines. When one enters a liberal arts school, they walk into a community with an emphasis on a holistic, well cultured education. At Boston College (BC), this multi-disciplinary education style is more structured than other institutions. BC mandates students take “core classes” which include everything from classes in cultural diversity to natural sciences to theology.
…show more content…
By dividing the arguments he allows himself to convince readers of one aspect of his argument at a time. The assertions act as levels, if a reader isn’t convinced after assertion #1, the following assertion has the ability to further appeal to logic and perhaps convince the reader of the previous point. This operates much like the foot in the door strategy which involves “getting a person to agree to a large request by first setting them up by having that person agree to a modest request” (Patel). Under the same ideology, if Dicpinigaitis gets a reader to agree with a small part of his argument it is more likely they will agree to the argument as a whole. Additionally, it acts as a fail safe as it allows readers to agree or disagree with specific parts of his argument; while not discrediting the whole argument. This allows for Dicpinigaitis to influence a larger percentage of readers, even if not…show more content…
Amherst College’s strategy, which does not mandate a core, provides a solution on how to maintain the liberal art ideals while not binding its students. This appeals to readers as it provides a logical solution while still maintaining the liberal art ideals. Alias then compares BC to a “babysitter” as they handhold their students, mandating they explore multiple disciplines instead of allowing them to discover them on their own (Dicpinigaitis). This parallel really resonates with readers as it highlights the lack of freedom through an everyday example, a babysitter. Dicpinigaitis’ use of this comparison is effective at striking up an emotion in his readers, and leaves them disliking BC’s mandating of the current core
Open Document