<p>
I don’t know what the standards are at the Univ. or Oregon – but at the university I attended (California), introductory STEM courses were taught in a large lecture format, supplemented by discussion groups and labs led by TA’s. At the time (early 70’s), the TA’s seemed to be generally fluent in Chinese, but not English. (*This might have improved since then, I don’t know).</p>
<p>Introductory courses in other areas tended to have much smaller classes, from seminars of 15 or less-- to a maximum lecture size of about 150 students. </p>
<p>So to start with, I’d say, small classes + English-speaking teachers would have been a good way for my alma mater to have improved my learning experience. </p>
<p>
If the goal is to increase the number of students who are successful in pursuing studies in the discipline, then revamping of the curriculum makes sense, especially for a public university, which at least in theory should be able to work cooperatively with the entire state-wide educational system. If the goal is to weed out all but a select few – then they can continue what they are doing. </p>
<p>I guess the question is: do they want to have more math & physics majors, or fewer? They are doing a good job of their goal is to have fewer.</p>