One statement presented was that the university wants small, topical focused courses, and not those that are foundations of disciplines. In this way, each department can develop a ranking. One problem that might arise is that other departments may say a course which is not ranked high by its home department might be crucial to other departments. The members then discussed developing a definition for a group satisfying course, but concern was that people would tailor the definition to suit their course. Another concern by cutting the number of courses was what it may do to the students1 programs.
Some students can make good choices and become more educated in the humanities, arts, etc.
This allows more individualization and more flexibility for the advanced students. Courses should be examined to make sure they represent a good range. Another suggestion was to have more than the three divisions or categories for courses to be ranked so that it is better to achieve coherence and breadth. J. Watson informed the council that at the last meeting of the Advising Implementation Team, the provost indicated he would like every freshman to take a course sometime during their first two terms which is group satisfying, taught by regular faculty, and has advising along with it. There is a subcommittee being formed to work on this plan.