Blast from the past: How things have changed!!

[darth1289]

@kaukauna

Also found this.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB928363145389536102

Here is an interesting passage

By 1989 history majors were no longer required to take the Western civilization sequence, but were “strongly encouraged” to select from the common core a “civilization” sequence suitable to their field of concentration…
…Other new history courses, though less lubricious, displayed the continuing shift in focus from the study of epochs, leading figures and major events to narrow faculty-research interests of a trendy and often culturally radical type. Undergraduates could now complete the major without taking a single course in U.S., European or Western history.

I think this is the major difference between Columbia’s and Chicago’s core now. Chicago’s is a little more flexible. It does not dictate “what courses” a student takes, as long as he or she takes courses in “core areas”

What do readers think? Advantage or dis-advantage?