Some said it was their “guilty pleasure” while others said they were disappointed, but the majority of students at Wednesday night’s discussion forum had mixed feelings about Columbia College’s Core Curriculum.

Hosted by student representatives of the Committee on the Core, the forum allowed about two dozen undergraduates from all classes to voice their opinions and concerns about what the College describes in its mission statement as the “cornerstone of a Columbia education.”

Responses varied widely—Tiffany Dockery, CC ’09, who applied to only University of Chicago and Columbia College because of their core curricula, said Columbia’s Core has not lived up to her expectations, while David Fierroz, CC ’11, who cannot quite put his finger on why he likes the Core, said he liked it almost against his will.

“I had a fantastic experience with both Lit Hum and CC in terms of it being very critical and not simply memorization,” Noah Schwartz, CC ’08, said. “But clearly lots of people don’t.”

The discussion ranged from visions for the Major Cultures requirement to religious sensitivity and alumni influence in the core. But for many, communication with those who design the Core was the largest concern.

“One of the biggest issues I’ve found is that there really isn’t any communication ... between students and professors, and students and administration,” Andy Schlesinger, CC ’08, said.

Students also shared grievances about what many described as the Core’s lack of consistent pedagogical quality and its insensitivity to certain cultures and religions. According to Contemporary Civilization student Rich Brown, CC ’10, the Quran is sometimes integrated in ways that reduce it to a “caricature.” His instructor, he said, had once asked him to characterize all of Islamic culture based on just two suras from the Quran.

Jonathan Siegel, CC ’08, asked how much power the Committee on the Core, which counts “accountability” and “visibility” as two of its major goals, has in effecting concrete changes in the Core.

“The practical answer is very little,” Schlesinger said.

“We’ve never actually taken a vote on an issue,” Sydney Cochran, CC ’08, said, reflecting on her two years of experience on the committee.

But despite the small scale of individual students’ roles, many emphasized the need for continued involvement.

“Let’s not go into it [this discussion] thinking we have little power to effect change,” Donna Desilus, CC ’10, said.

david.xia@columbiaspectator.com