University of Virginia Library

New Curriculum Spirit

Last Tuesday, the Faculty of the College
of Arts and Sciences took two long strides in
reforming the spirit, if not the letter of the
College curriculum. By rejecting two
alternatives to the Educational Policy and
Curriculum Committee resolution to grant
degree credit for service physical education
courses (i.e. gym course), the Faculty paved
the way towards granting degree credit for
these non-academic courses.

The first stride made by the Faculty is
obvious to most students. They breathed new
life into the physical education courses
offered to students in the College. Until last
year, all College students were required to
take one year of physical education with no
credit hours whatsoever. Last year, during
reform of the College curriculum, the Faculty
ended the requirement but sent back to
committee a resolution to grant two degree
credit hours for service physical education.

The physical education courses, according
to Gene Corrigan, newly appointed Director
of University Athletic Programs, are not
completely "academic," but he added that
they are still worthwhile courses. They do
teach students certain skills and do provide a
form of organized relaxation from the world
of academic studies. If the Faculty votes to
grant two degree credit hours for service
physical education, they will make the
College curriculum a little more well rounded.

During Tuesday's session, the Faculty also
rejected a motion to allow students in the
College to receive degree credit for
'professional' physical education courses
offered by the School of Education. Included
in these courses are classes on safety and
health education, coaching, and sports and
games. We agree with the Faculty that most
of these courses are 'guts' and have little
worthwhile purpose for students pursuing a
degree in the liberal arts. We disagree,
however, that all of these 'professional'
physical education courses are not worthwhile
for the College student.

In debating the ROTC issue last spring,
great was given to the argument that
not all ROTC curses were not worthy of
degree credit. The argument continued that
the ROTC courses should be examined course
by course to determine which courses were
worthy of such credit. We feel that the
Faculty should apply this argument to the
'professional' physical education courses. We
doubt if everyone is sure that every
'professional' physical education course is not
worthwhile study for a College student.
Either the number of hours of 'professional'
physical education courses applicable to a
College degree should be limited or a course
by course examination of the courses would
seem to be fair.

The second stride taken by the Faculty is
less obvious. Dante Germino, a respected
professor of the government department,
stated last Tuesday that if degree credit is
granted for non-academic activities that are
deemed worthwhile by the Faculty, students
will be approaching the Faculty with new,
experimental programs that might not be
purely academic but could be worthwhile
study for the serious College student. Mr.
Germino stated that to be consistent, the
Faculty should grant degree credit for these
worthwhile programs.

What Mr. Germino seemed to be suggesting
was that the University begin to develop a
new spirit in the College curriculum. No
longer should degree credit be offered just for
classroom work. Worthwhile study can also be
done outside the classroom. And while these
programs might not be purely academic, they
could definitely be worthwhile.