Reconstructing Honors at Yeshiva College

Over the last two months, what has often turned into heated debates has raged on with regards to YC’s honors courses. While early accounts from students on currently offered courses vary, faculty, administration and students remain locked in debates over how to properly define an "honors-level" class. Stemming from Dean Adler's vision of Yeshiva College as a source of modern intellectual scholarship, the need for clearer guidelines has become more evident.

Dean Adler described his conception of what an honors program at YC might look like. He views a system in which there would not be an entirely separate "honors college" for selected students, rather an option for sufficiently motivated students to graduate with an honors degree. In order to attain this degree, a student would have to satisfy a more intensive curriculum involving several key factors. Aside from choosing a core number of courses from the "honors" selection, there would be independent research and opportunities for summer internships available to those taking the honors track. These opportunities would be geared towards developing "training in critical thinking" as well as proficient writing skills. Additionally, a central aspect of the program would be the requirement of a senior thesis.

Before any such program could be put into place, the more pressing issue of how to define an honors course must be addressed. To this end, the YC Curriculum Committee has served as a vehicle for facilitating faculty discussion on tèe issue. Discussions now center on current and proposed honors offerings, and focus on what sets them apart as "honors". Many criteria have been proposed to discriminate "honors" courses from their non-honors counterparts, including an intensive writing component, a greater sophistication and range in material and, as termed by English professor Dr. Joanne Jacobson, the "expectation of a greater degree of intellectual initiative on the part of students."

A proposal from the Honors Committee Task Force on Honors Courses, dated March 9, set forth three options to receive "honors" credit. One option would require all students in a given course to do honors work, another would give honors credit to individuals who receive a citation for exceptional work in a course, and the third option, one which has engendered much debate, would allow students to "self-select to do more and better work" than the work possibly defined by any of three subtypes. This work may include a writing-intensive option requiring additional writing assignments, a more substantiative term paper, a "fourth-hour" option that will meet for an additional hour beyond regular class time, or a supererogatory independent research project.

Stemming from these criteria is the question central to the "honors" debate: Should honors courses be taught on an honors level and limit admission to honor students, or should they be geared towards average students while allowing for the submission of additional honors-level work?

Professor Alan Brill is very firm in supporting an honors-only designation. "Good honors work is not quantifiable by extra pages read or written...the mode of instruction is crucial. The quality of honors is achieved by pushing students beyond their normal scope, horizon and abilities." In a memo to the committee, Professor Brill suggested that honors courses do more than merely "walking the students through the book," rather they should deal with the core questions of the field in study. Because critical thinking and independent application of principles is the key, Brill suggests that rigorous standards be accepted in advance.

What this idea means in terms of courses themselves is simple--courses would be open only to those students taking them for honors credit. This way, all class discussions and assignments are expected to be of a higher degree of scholarship. As honors courses would be taught differently from non-honors courses, there would be no watering down of courses to maintain the success of those not inclined towards honors courses.

These arguments are the basis for the honors-only option, one that has been endorsed by student representatives to the committee. These student have maintain that the purpose of developing an honors curriculum is to increase the level of scholarship among both students and faculty. To that end, if a course were geared specifically towards "honors" students then it would be more intellectually demanding of the students. If the class included non-honors participants, the level of class discussion would similarly be reduced. This viewpoint was the focus of a student memo calling for an increase in "the level of student involvement and participation, across the board."

One suggestion made by the students was that a course can be deemed as "honors" if it includes some feature that makes it unique from more traditional courses. One student representative to the committee stressed that honors courses are not simply advanced-level courses or courses taught by teachers who demand more work. Instead, they can be those which demonstrate individuality on the part of the students and faculty. This may include in-class presentations, or, as in Dr. Haahr's Arthurian Legends, a unique internet-based curriculum. Another option, team teaching, was attempted in last semester's honors course in Modernism, a course co-taught by Drs. Bevan and Shrecker. Interdisciplinary teaching, while allowing for the course to branch into different areas, does bring with it some problems. Some students noted that under such a setup, they were not always aware of which teacher was responsible for which materials. This resulted in some confusion, and the overall response was mixed.

Dr. Barry Potvin, a biology professor, offered his feelings on what would make science courses worthy of the "honors" designation. Science courses are particularly difficult to design for "honors" designation, as they are more fact-based than conceptually oriented. He suggested that students review "recent journal articles, which would be read and thoroughly discussed after students have read them on their own." Another possibility would be to open up new laboratory sections which can be designed to allow for more student planning and execution. Currently, students have an opportunity to do significant independent research in the Advanced Biotechnology course supervised by Dr. Danishefsky.

In contrast to honors-only courses, some faculty members support giving students the option to take "honors" courses for non-honors credit. Many believe that having a class in which the students are expected to do different levels of work would create its own problems. "Under such circumstances, teachers would be forced to teach to everybody, not letting those with an honors option to take full advantage." Rabbi Shalom Carmy, YC Professor of Philosophy, though, felt that having such a mixture could benefit everyone. "I believe that if a significant number of students are doing the honors option, that does effect the general level of sophistication in the class." Of course, problems may arise in the other direction, as those not taking honors credit may not be as motivated to participate, and may even feel out-shined by those taking honors credit.

The general consensus among faculty is that honors courses will require additional research and planning if they are to be successful. For this reason, many faculty members who have done research in relevant areas are working to prepare relevant honors courses in their own area of expertise. Some of the courses to be offered next year will include Early Jewish Biblical Interpretation, taught by Dr. Moshe Bernstein; Nationalism and Patriotism, by Rabbi Carmy; Post Modernity and Deconstruction, by Dr. Bevan; and Physics and Astronomy, co-taught by Drs. Cwilich and Otway.

What, then, does the future hold for honors at YC? Currently, Dean Adler is putting together a proposal for the Board of Directors concerning the program. Although money is certainly involved in the setting up of and the researching of new courses, the dean is optimistic about the proposal’s approval. The consensus of the Curriculum Committee is that, for now, honors courses should remain strictly aimed at honors students. While that status does not exclude the possibility of opening the courses to non-honors students in the future, it means that the focus will remain on setting the highest standards possible for YU students.