I’m sorry that you don’t see the word “open” on the curriculum page although they use many synonyms for it on that page. They use it. Try the search function. Here’s a quote from their website page on Academics:
“It’s no surprise that 90% of incoming students said that Rochester’s distinctive open curriculum had a positive effect on their decision to enroll.”
There are no specific course requirements in the so-called “cluster requirements”. There is nothing unusual about this at open curriculum schools. Wesleyan, for example, has “general education requirements” and no one disputes that they have an open curriculum.
The key is that there is no core curriculum and that students make all of their own courses chiuces. The only required course is a writing course and even in this case, the student chooses the writing course.
I have no idea how this is in conflict with the concept of an open curriculum.
Williams College is considered a model of a school with an open curriculum. Here’s a statement from their page on Academics:
“While there are no required courses at Williams, all students take at least 3 in Arts & Humanities, 3 in social sciences, and 3 in sciences and mathematics. All students also take at least 2 writing-intensive courses and one course to improve their ability to reason mathematically and abstractly. And while Williams has no formal language requirement, we do require that all students explore diversity by taking at least one course that examines how groups, cultures, and societies interact with, and challenge, one another.”
Even Brown which was the trail blazer in open curriculum, says, “The success of Brown’s open curriculum rests on the strength of our academic advisors . . .” Students don’t simply select courses willy nilly without regard to coherence and planning. Through the advising the university influences students’ planning choices and students’ final decisions require the approval of their academic advisors. There is not total freedom to choose whatever.
Wesleyan gets away with the “open” designation by specifically bracketing out those students who wish to pursue honors; the academic clusters are requirements for them but merely “expectations” for the great unwashed.
There are variations on a theme. They have their own version. The point is no core curriculum and student empowerment in course selection.
Are people here being argumentative just for the sake of being argumentative? Or do we have purists who can’t accept even minor tweaks to the theme. Here’s another article on the topic:
I’d like to remind the objectors that the point is to help the OP. A perfectly innocent piece of information was posted to highlight a difference in the approach to instruction at the 2 colleges. And there is a difference. All in an effort to help the OP make their choice.
Since then we’ve been led down a rabbit hole to debate whether The Rochester Curriculum truly qualifies as “open curriculum” or not.
I have no idea how any of this debate helps the OP.
For comparison, CWRU’s general education requirements are listed at Unified General Education Requirements < Case Western Reserve University . No specific courses are required, but seven categories must be fulfilled (a course may fulfill more than one category). The writing category does require five courses.