Reversing an earlier decision, the Committee on Instruction has voted to allow the Humanities 1 and 2 sequence to retain its first-year seminar status.
Based on books from the classical tradition, Humanities 1 and 2 is a two-term discussion and lecture program for freshmen. Students must pass both courses to receive first-year seminar credit.
"Seminar equivalency was restored because pragmatic arguments for doing so prevailed," COI Chair Jonathan Crewe wrote in an e-mail message. "Interpretations of the freshman seminar mandate vary considerably, and seem to have changed over time. Given this variation, there seemed to be no decisive criterion for denying equivalency."
In the summer of 1995, the COI decided to revoke the program's first-year seminar equivalency, beginning with the Class of 2000.
Controversy has surrounded the Humanities sequence since it was granted seminar status in the 1990-91 academic year.
Roger Ulrich, the current director of the first-year seminar program, said the biggest argument over seminar status concerned whether the Humanities sequence fulfills the first-year seminar's goal of getting students to focus on a specific topic and meeting in small groups to focus on it.
"Many people believe that Humanities 1 and 2 is too much of a survey course that breaks down into small groups," Ulrich said.
Approximately 60 students are enrolled in the Humanities sequence each year, which breaks into discussion groups of 15-20 students.
Ulrich said he is a strong supporter of the Humanities sequence and wants to keep it as a seminar.
"In a nutshell, I feel the major goals of the first-year seminar program are to teach academic research and writing skills," he said. "The major goal of the first-year seminar program is to culminate students' first year writing experience with writing and research at the college level, and I think the Humanities sequence does a good job of doing that."
Lack of decisive criterion for denying equivalency was not the sole reason for restoration of seminar status to Humanities 1 and 2.
Crewe also wrote that "the COI reinstated the freshman seminar equivalency of Humanities 1 and 2 ... pending review of the whole freshman seminar program."
"The COI decided that a general review of freshman seminar program goals and results really took precedence," Crewe wrote.
Crewe said the COI's review would probably be an examination of the rationale, goals and effectiveness of the first-year seminar program.
"What I hope to do in my role as director is to talk to both students and faculty about the program," Ulrich said.
"I'd like to talk with both faculty who are involved with the first-year seminar program as well as those who aren't to get an idea of what they expect of students who write papers, and to students to find out want they want to get out of the program."
Ulrich said some of the research regarding the first-year seminar program has been conducted by the Writing Composition Center, where people involved with first-year writing are conducting a survey to assay what students are getting from the program.
Ulrich said he did not believe the COI's decision to review the first-year seminar program reflects "any desire to redefine rules to exclude the Humanities sequence or any other seminar."
"We would like to reach consensus as to what we expect students to get from the first-year seminar program," Ulrich said. "When that consensus is reached, not only Humanities, but other seminars, will able to address more efficiently the goals of the program."
Crewe noted the first-year seminar program has been running for approximately 20 years without review.
Italian Professor Walter Stephens, director of the Humanities program, said he was happy with the COI's decision to restore equivalency.
"The freshman seminar program encourages writing across the curriculum," Stephens said. "The interface between reading and writing in Humanities 1 and 2 fits well into that guise."
Some freshmen said they would not have time to take the Humanities series if it were not for the seminar credit.
"Before being in the class, I probably would not have taken the course if it didn't have seminar status. I just don't have time in my schedule," Alex Yates '00 said. "However, after being in the class for a while, I would take it no matter what because it's simply a great class."
Ben Friedman '00 said he did not consider the Humanities sequence in any context other than to fulfill the freshman seminar requirement.
"I had to take a freshman seminar," Friedman said. "Maybe I would have taken the course later, but I was mainly concerned about getting the seminar out of the way."
According to Associate Dean of the Humanities Mary Jean Green, the Humanities sequence has had large wait lists for the last two years.
"We have no documentation on why this is happening, but entering students seem genuinely interested in taking a course of this sort," Green said.
Ulrich said it was impossible to tell if the large student interest comes as a result of first-year seminar status.
"The only way to judge that is by removing first-year seminar status," he said.
"I personally do not wish to make [seminar enrollment in] Humanities 1 and 2 bigger in order to protect the extensive and rich assortment of first-year seminars we are now able to offer on campus," Ulrich added.
He said it may be possible to make the Humanities sequence a larger course if there is a section added to serve students who do not need or desire first-year seminar credit.
"We have had some conversations about starting a section open only to sophomores in the course," Ulrich said.
"In such a case I would not want to combine the sophomores with the first-year students in the small discussion sections so that the experience of taking a first-year writing course would not be compromised."
Ulrich added that opinions of veteran Humanities 1 and 2 instructors and the director of the Humanities program would be obtained before such a modification was made.
