Fordham’s Core Revision Is Underway

Major modification to the university’s arts and sciences core curriculum set to be completed by April

Violeta Juncaj, FCRH ’23 and a student on the pre-health track, agreed with Choudhury on the difficulty of core classes. She said she felt that the material required for the core classes was much more complicated than she had expected and added that the larger writing assignments required by some of the core curriculum courses normally land during the final exam season or close to it, which interferes with her major classes.

Despite concerns and complaints with the core, Rogers said she appreciates certain aspects of the curriculum. She praised the emphasis on writing and the interesting reading material, as well as courses such as “Texts and Contexts: Latinx Speculation.”

“They choose really interesting reading material that sticks with you,” she said. “It also makes you think and broadens your interests.”

As for suggestions in regard to revising the core, Rogers recommended trimming the requirements for STEM majors, as well as avoiding the reteaching of skills that students may have already cultivated in high school in classes such as the English composition series.

“I think we should try to put an emphasis on making sure people don’t have to elongate their time spent (at Fordham) because they didn’t do a core since they were focusing on their major and then they have to do the core at the very end, losing sight of what they did in their major because it was so far ago,” Rogers said.

As a result of these concerns, the core revision process began with assembling a team of faculty members representing all colleges and disciplines across the university. The advisory board, which was chaired by Robert Hume, associate dean of the faculty of arts and sciences and professor in the political science department, and Kirsten Swinth, professor of history and American studies, published a report outlining the faculty’s argument for revising the core curriculum.

The advisory board, which was disbanded after the stage one committee was formed, worked with Dean of FCLC Laura Auricchio, Dean of FCRH Maura Mast, and the revision committees to oversee the core curriculum’s first steps toward modification.

The report released by the board was supplemented with statistics and feedback from student surveys. According to Auricchio and Mast, the revision committees have placed the core curriculum “on the chopping block” and are expanding the implications that the modifications may have. Auricchio emphasized the importance of the core curriculum and acknowledged that it is imperative to periodically reassess its foundations.

“Fordham is very proud of coming from a 500-year Jesuit tradition, and so the core will always be grounded in those fundamental values — but should also always be responsive to the world as it changes around us,” she said. “I think that’s why any university core should be revisited from time to time.”

In addition to students, Mast and other faculty members also expressed dissatisfaction with the current core curriculum noting that certain requirements the core requires may be structured in a way that doesn’t help students.

Each stage of reworking the core is faculty-driven, though students on either campus will be invited to participate in discussions with revision committees. Employing a backward design model for the revision, faculty committees will first tackle goals and desired outcomes and then move forward with requirement specifics.

“We’re really starting from scratch,” Auricchio said.

She added that the revision committees are focused on the vision and overall goal of the new core, as well as the learning objectives that students should achieve by the end of their collegiate career at Fordham.

According to the report prepared by the initial advisory board, stage one — entitled “Vision” — will “identify the broadest common learning goals for the core curriculum” and connect them to “specific learning outcomes.” Stage two will then entail mapping the curriculum onto the established learning goals and outcomes and choosing a curriculum model. The third and final stage will finalize plans for the new core’s implementation, administration and assessment.

Mast explained that if stage one is successful, a stage two committee will be formed, composed of elected faculty members who will collaborate on redesigning the core through fall 2023.

“Courses will need to be approved, and then phase three will be faster in that it’s just developing a structure for oversight and assessment,” Mast said. “It’s still a year, at least.”

Auricchio underscored the importance of the assessment stage in the core curriculum’s revision plan. She noted that the learning outcomes determined in stage one will serve as the yardstick by which the new core’s success is measured.

“We envision this as a constant process of assessment and improvement,” she said.

Although revision committees of each stage will be working toward benchmark checkpoints, the academic year of the revised core’s implementation is yet to be determined. Whether non-first-year students at the time of implementation will be eligible to take advantage of the revised core is also undecided.

Auricchio and Mast discussed the notion of a rollout plan that offers the revised core to firstyears, the traditional procedure by which new undergraduate programs are implemented. Though faculty members of the stage three committee will propose the final implementation plan, Mast acknowledged potential complications of offering two distinct core programs.

“It’s probably going to be a complex change of requirements,” she said. “If we have too much flexibility, then we might not be able to meet what students need. We have limited resources — we are constrained. So, we’ll have to think carefully about the implementation.”

The deans also shared a hope that the core curriculum will no longer serve as a list of requirements that students have to fulfill.

OBSERVER

They aim for it to be more useful and relevant to the academic experience of students.

“One thing that we are in agreement on, based on the feedback we’ve heard from students, is that, to a lot of students, the core is a checklist of things to be gotten through,” Aurrichio said. “We don’t want it to be that. The faculty doesn’t want it to be that. The students don’t want it to be that.”

According to Mast, the committee working on stage one of the revision process is currently determining the “abilities, skills, perspectives, experiences and mindsets” a contemporary Fordham student should possess and is drafting universal learning goals and outcomes that will guide the stage two committee in designing the new core.

While referring to revisions, Mast said “whether that Fordham student is in Gabelli Lincoln Center, studying biology here at Rose Hill, or English, it’s supposed to transcend departments.”

Insiya Gandhi contributed additional reporting to this story.

By MEGAN YERRABELLI Asst. News Editor

The Offices of Student Involvement (OSI) and Residential Life (ResLife), alongside Dean of Students at Lincoln Center Jenifer Campbell, hosted a grand opening celebration of the McMahon RamFit Center on Jan. 19, a week after the center became fully operational. The first 250 students to attend the event were given a reusable water bottle with the RamFit logo on the front, and light snacks were provided while students toured the new equipment and machinery.

According to Christina Frankovic-Sepsi, interim director of student involvement, there were approximately 125 students in attendance and 50 university staff members.

The fitness center was designed by Joseph Scaltro, director of engineering services. Scaltro worked with OSI and ResLife to organize the gym’s soft opening, which took place from Dec. 12-20. During that period, the center debuted its cardio and weight rooms for student use. The multipurpose studios were then available after the gym fully reopened Jan. 12, and the area is now accessible to students and faculty.

According to students who were present during the launch, the gym was almost at full capacity during and following the event.

Emma Ritchie, Fordham College at Lincoln Center (FCLC) ’25, arrived at the gym with a friend around 4 p.m., nearly two hours after the event had concluded, and noted that she struggled to find a space to workout.

“We could hardly get any machines to use,” Ritchie said. “The gym was pretty busy. Specifically, the cardio room and weight room were very full.”

Despite the large number of students who attended the event and visited the facilities, there were mixed reactions from gymgoers about the type of equipment provided and how the space was organized. Taehun

Kim, Gabelli School of Business at Lincoln Center (GSBLC) ‘25, felt that the weight room was lacking in certain aspects. For example, he noted that the weights only go up to 50 pounds. Kim added that the weight section needs dumbbells going up to 100 pounds, another squat rack or power rack, and at least two more bench presses.

“Those movements are essential for compound exercises,” he said. “Anyone who does exercise seriously knows how important compounds is.”

Attendees also criticized a shortage of locker space and the ResLife policies that have been instituted for renting those lockers.

The signs posted on each locker say, “‘Locker Rentals are available for the semester for an additional cost. If you are interested in renting a locker for the semester, please come by the main office, MCM 108 to inquire more information.

Please note: all unregistered locks will be clipped.”

According to the Office of Residential Life, each locker costs $50 per semester and there are fewer than 30 currently available for use.

Isaak Abud, GSBLC ’25, noticed these signs when touring the gym after the event.

“It’s a weird decision to not only put so few lockers on a campus of 5,000, but then also make none available after rentals, not to mention the additional cost after tuition prices,” Abud said. “I feel like the lockers should be first come, first serve like most gyms.”

Despite a few complaints, some students were excited that Lincoln Center students now had access to these new facilities. Vishesh Chawla, GSBLC ’25 and vice president of the Commuting Student’s Association, gave insight to how the gym will benefit commuters who struggle to find fitness space near their home.

“I think what commuter students struggle in is to find a gym around their house and to dedicate time to that gym,” Chawla said. “Because it’s convenient for them before and after classes, they can just come and de-stress themselves and maybe take a shower or meet their friends here.”

He also mentioned how the new space can support more commuter-resident interactions on campus.

“I think it’s going to help bridge the gap between commuters and residents to act as a specific lounge space where both of them can meet,” he said.

Campbell also commented on her positive expectations of the new facilities and says she is excited about the possibilities that RamFit will provide.

“I think students are going to enjoy it. It’s a nice testament to us being able to improve the offerings for students,” Campbell said.

The RamFit Center will operate from 7 a.m. to 10:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 9 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. The dean’s newsletter noted that the gym’s cleaning and restocking hours will take place from 11 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 5 p.m. to 6 p.m, during which the center will be closed.

Andrew Dressner contributed additional reporting to this story.