<p>I still think the 200 level is not the point where students should be shut out of options because they weren’t deemed “good enough,” no matter the discipline. This is the level where students should still be able to explore, delve a little more deeply than the introductory 100 level and see if this is something they want to pursue more seriously at an advanced level. Then, at the 300 level, if classes need to be closed off for more serious workshopping or discussion by students who meet certain criteria, then that sounds reasonable to me. </p>
<p>This may be an issue at any school that is “known” for being strong in an area or attracts a certain type of kid (eg., “artsy”) – you will be competing against many others with similar interests for limited resources and spots. I believe that Oberlin offers just two intro creative writing courses: one is fiction, and one is poetry. Why don’t they expand the offerings then to give more students a chance to build on what they’ve learned if they’re not quite “good enough” to become serious fiction writers but find that just a taste is not enough? Is this typical of other disciplines where you can’t really go beyond the 100 level??</p>
<p>D’yer maker, I think you are really trivializing this situation. Yes, kids are adaptable and should be open to exploring new things at an LAC. But, that is a separate issue from being blocked from taking things that ARE of interest. It doesnt’ mean that the student isn’t willing to try new things! </p>
<p>I also think that not offering a chance to explore beyond the 100 level is contrary to the spirit and concept of an LAC. It sounds like a university. I recall a number of university information sessions where they said that they operate like a liberal arts college in that students don’t have to major in the discipline to take courses in it! (or can take classes in different colleges at the university even if they’re not enrolled.)</p>