The Distribution Credit System

David Diaz

According to “The State of General Education” by Mark Bauerlein, universities are using a system of distribution credits to give students a wide area of subjects to study. This poses a problem in that students are taking courses that they don’t need to get their specialized college degree. According to Baurelein students view these required courses as, “a bunch of heterogeneous hoops to pass through.” Also, the distribution system creates the possibility that students can acquire an education of random courses that don’t relate to one another at all versus a strong set of courses in which each builds on the others. So why is it that colleges have adapted a system of distribution credits over the traditional core curriculum system which entails fewer classes with a broader focus?

Bauerlein answers this question by saying that “One, students like having more choice. Two, faculty either don’t believe in, or are scared to declare, what every graduate should have read, studied, and remembered. For all too many of them, the worst trait is “prescriptive.” Although, there is a lot of truth to that statement, I have an alternate theory. Money is the motivating factor behind the distribution system. First, as Baurelein stated, the distribution system provides more classes which draws in more students, which brings in more money. Second, the distribution system complicates the required classes for a degree. This means that students who want to take the minimum amount of courses to get a degree have to stay longer and complete all or their distribution credits. On the other hand, students who attend college for the sake of learning will be interested in many of the extra classes offered and will likely stay to complete as many as possible. Consequently, extra classes means a harder schedule with a lower chance of passing or an easier schedule and more time spent in college. All of the above situations have one thing in common, students spending more time in college meaning that they pay more tuition and the institute makes more money.

In conclusion, Bauerlein makes an interesting point about the curriculum of colleges becoming a system of distribution credits with very little core curriculum. He acknowledges that this system has a potential for disaster, but has been adapted for two reasons. However, the underlying reason behind those two reasons is simply that this system can rake in more money to universities.