Fordham University faculty members are currently revising the core curriculum with the hope of voting on the new curriculum early next semester and beginning the implementation process shortly after. The process began because faculty members believed the curriculum was no longer serving its purpose.

Over the past five years, four committees of faculty members have progressed through several phases of the revision process. Last spring, the process was delayed after faculty members were unable to agree on the proposed curriculum, an outcome that was not planned for. Now, the Core Reconciliation Committee is picking up the work of the previous Phase 2 committee and advancing the revision process.

Fordham’s Core Curriculum

Fordham’s core curriculum is central to its Jesuit mission, and its goal is to prepare students to engage in global society by providing a well-rounded education in various disciplines. “These courses are designed to nurture curiosity, inspire a love of learning and provide you with the foundation needed to engage in lifelong learning,” the university website says.

The current curriculum was implemented in 2008 after a two-year revision process. It is defined by Eloquentia Perfecta (EP) classes, which teach students how to speak and write eloquently and interdisciplinary engagement courses, which span various disciplines.

While the curriculum is central to the university’s Jesuit mission, Fordham believes it has become outdated in the 17 years since its implementation, and needs to be revised. 

“Fordham University has undertaken a revision of its core curriculum to reaffirm and renew the significance of liberal arts education and to address the changed world that our students will encounter when they leave Fordham,” the university website says.

The current revision aims to update the core to be in line with political and societal changes. The motivations behind the revision, as well as the goals of the revision process, were created by the Pre-Planning Committee, the first faculty committee assigned to the revision process.

Phase 0: Pre-Planning

During the 2020 to 2021 fiscal year, a committee of 10 faculty members, led by Kirsten Swinth, Ph.D., professor of history and Robert Hume, vice dean for Faculty Affairs, was created to complete the first phase of the revision process, now referred to as Phase 0. 

Over the course of a year, the committee assessed the current core, took input from faculty members and students, compared Fordham’s core to other Jesuit, private and public universities then developed a three-phase process for the core revision.

The resulting document was presented on Sept. 15, 2021. It explained the motivations behind the revision, including the need to equip students to be global participants, make the curriculum smaller so that it is accessible to all students and make it more interdisciplinary.

“The decision to revise the core comes out of foundational commitments that the faculty and the University make to our students, some of which have become urgent over the last year and a half with renewed dedication to diversity, equity, and antiracism,” the document said. “Our current core curriculum … no longer fully fulfills those commitments.”

The document outlined three phases, each conducted by a new faculty committee that would be selected based on nominations by faculty members. Phase 1 would define the goals of the core curriculum and create an overall vision for the core. Phase 2 would develop a new curriculum based on the goals outlined in Phase 1 and Phase 3 would create an implementation plan for the new curriculum.

“We recommend that core curriculum revision should be faculty-driven, student-focused, and mission-centered, with appropriate consultation with administrative stakeholders,” the document said.

Based on the pre-planning document, a new faculty committee was created to undergo the Phase 1 process.

Phase 1: Vision and Goals

A committee of 12 faculty members conducted Phase 1 during the 2022 to 2023 fiscal year. The resulting document, which was presented on April 26, 2023, established a vision statement and learning objectives for the core curriculum and outlined the process for Phase 2. 

The vision highlighted the core as being built on Jesuit and Catholic traditions. It stated that the core should be humanistic, integrative and ethically aware and should engage students and faculty with interdisciplinary learning that relates to current global issues.

During the process, committee members consulted with students, faculty councils and alumni to determine what aspects of the core were important and what aspects were missing. As a result of input, faculty members determined that the core should fulfill three goals: knowing, doing and being.

Michael Zampelli, S.J., associate professor of theatre and member of the Phase 1 and Reconciliation committees, explained that these goals lend to the need for the curriculum to be interconnected and involve various disciplines.

“Most every major problem that we have to deal with in the world today, you need more than one discipline to deal with,” Zampelli said. “So how would we position students in terms of giving them an idea of what they are supposed to be, what they should be knowing, what they should be doing, and what kind of person that we presume they should be becoming?” 

In addition to providing the goals that the new core curriculum should adhere to, the Phase 1 document provided deliverables that included a need for a smaller core and a list of requirements that can be met by courses in any department.

The document stated that Phase 2 would be completed in the 2023 to 2024 academic year and said that the Phase 2 document, outlining the new curriculum, would require an affirmative vote by the Fordham College Rose Hill (FCRH), Fordham College Lincoln Center (FCLC), School of Professional and Continuing Studies (PCS) and Gabelli School of Business (GSB) councils, as well as the GSB Undergraduate Curriculum Committee. 

It did not state, however, what would happen if the Phase 2 document did not pass, an omission that created a roadblock in the revision process.

Phase 2: Creating the Curriculum

While Phase 2 began in 2023, the document outlining the new proposed curriculum was not completed until the end of the 2024 to 2025 fiscal year, a year later than expected. The committee had nine members, some of whom changed between the two academic years. 

During that time, committee members used the Phase 1 document, specifically the resulting goals of knowing, doing and being, as a guide to create the new core curriculum. The resulting curriculum involved a reduction from 21 to 14 requirements, with separate pathways for The Ailey School, GSB, PCS, honors and transfer students. 

The new curriculum omitted some current requirements, including the Natural Science sequence and EP courses. Some requirements remained relatively unchanged, including philosophy, theology and language requirements. 

New requirements included the implementation of a First Year Experience sequence, consisting of a first-year seminar, rhetoric seminar and New York Experience course, a Natural Foundations sequence, including a quantitative scientific inquiry course and an Interdisciplinary Thematic Sequence, involving at least one course that investigates diversity in the United States, Global Communities or Justice and Ethics. 

The new core also provided increased flexibility for completing each requirement, with many requirements able to be fulfilled by courses in various departments. 

After the completion of the Phase 2 document in May, faculty members convened in a Zoom meeting to vote on the new curriculum. During the meeting, the FCLC council reported that they had voted down the proposal, with a vote of 20 in favor, 19 against and one neutral. 

Since the pre-planning document did not specify what would happen if one of the councils voted down the document, Hume, dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at the time, who was overseeing the meeting, decided that if one council voted down the proposal, it could not go forward, according to Glenn Hendler, Ph.D., professor of English and American studies and a member of the Phase 2 and Reconciliation committees. So, without conducting votes in the other councils, Hume ended the meeting and the document did not pass. 

Since it was the end of the academic year, no more action was taken to further the Phase 2 process after the meeting.

When Jessica Lang, Ph.D., dean of Arts and Sciences, began her position in July, she was tasked with advancing the revision process. However, because the Phase 0 document did not say how to proceed if the Phase 2 document did not pass, Lang had to create a new process.

Reconciliation Committee: Continuation of Phase 2

This fall, the Core Reconciliation Committee was created to continue the work of the Phase 2 committee. As with the other committees, nominations were submitted by faculty members and a committee of 11 individuals was created. 

Lang said that in starting the new phase, she wanted to think about the overall purpose of revising the core curriculum.

“I want the core to be an inspiring document,” Lang said. “I want incoming students and their parents and prospective students and their parents to read this and be like, that is a place where I want to attend, that’s a place where I want my child to go to. I want it to speak to them. It should be an accessible document. It should be, I hope, inspiring.”

While Lang has been tasked with leading the Reconciliation committee, she is not involved in creating the new curriculum.

“I’m not trying to influence the process,” Lang said. “I have absolute trust that they’re going to come up with a great document.”

The committee’s first task was to identify individuals’ issues with the proposed core curriculum. According to Zampelli, they first read through the document several times. Then they sent out a survey to tenure and tenure-track faculty, which resulted in 65 single-spaced pages of feedback. They also talked to the various councils to gather input. 

Committee members are now looking at the feedback they’ve received to identify the main issues. Zampelli said the difficulty they’ve faced is contradicting input from faculty members. For example, whereas some individuals think the curriculum should be reduced, others want it expanded.

“We’re in the process now of digesting all that information, and then weighing what … are the things that really need to be addressed,” Zampelli said. “We’re not going to be able to play to the ends of the spectrum. We’re going to have to try to figure out where the majority of faculty respondents are.”

Currently, through looking at the input they’ve received, the committee is coming up with alternatives to the curriculum to address the issues they’ve identified. After creating the necessary changes, they will consult faculty and students for feedback before voting on the final document.

They hope to finalize the document by the end of this semester and vote early next semester, according to Hendler. 

After the new curriculum is approved, they will move on to Phase 3, which will also be charged by Lang and will involve the implementation of the new core. Once implemented, incoming students will adhere to the new curriculum, with current students continuing with the current curriculum. 

Hendler said they don’t know how long Phase 3 will take, but the curriculum would likely not be implemented for the class of 2030.

Both Zampelli and Lang highlighted that the entire revision process, though lengthy, is one that faculty members care deeply about because of their investment and passion in their discipline and students. Lang also said that the revision process has given Fordham a great opportunity.

“I think we have an opportunity with this new core to really attract students to Fordham,” Lang said. “The core should be a document that answers the question, what makes Fordham Fordham, and what do Fordham students gain through a Fordham education?”