Note from the Editor: This is a letter from the English, Literature and World Languages Department regarding the proposal that was presented by the General Education Task Force. This letter dives into the perspective of faculty members who believe they, and the courses taught within ELWL, will be directly affected by the reform proposal that has gone public. The information presented in this letter was articulated by members of the ELWL Department of CASE, and provides information on their stance and citing that the proposal goes against what the university’s core beliefs stand for.
As faculty members of the English, Literature and World Languages Department (ELWL) at Ferris State University, we are seriously concerned about the current proposal to significantly cut the General Education curriculum. While we appreciate the commitment to supporting student success and reducing financial burden, the process by which these changes are being pursued is deeply flawed — and the consequences of proceeding on this timeline could be far-reaching and harmful to our future graduates.
Any meaningful revision to general education must begin with a thorough review of Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs). This is not merely best practice — it is the foundational step that gives curriculum reform its legitimacy. Revising our Core Competencies requires engagement with all relevant stakeholders: employers, disciplinary experts, alumni, students, and faculty. Only after SLOs have been carefully reviewed and improved should the institution turn to curriculum mapping — examining how well current courses meet those outcomes and whether courses within individual majors reinforce them.
This process has not been followed. What has been presented instead — a survey and a handful of town halls — does not constitute the kind of data-driven, evidence-based deliberation that a decision of this magnitude demands.
Ferris State is an accredited institution accountable to the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) and offers several majors that are accredited by agencies. The HLC expects that significant curricular changes be grounded in assessment data, inclusive stakeholder processes, and demonstrated attention to student learning. The speed and manner with and in which this proposal has moved forward would, in all likelihood, raise serious red flags with our accreditors. This is not a risk that Ferris State University should be willing to take.
The irregularities that have characterized the task force’s work are equally troubling. Faculty and staff with expertise in general education — including those with specializations in SLOs related to diversity, culture, and written, verbal, and nonverbal communication — have been marginalized or silenced in these discussions. The result is that we are abandoning evidence, expertise, and broad faculty governance.
As an open-access institution, Ferris State serves students who arrive with a wide range of preparation and backgrounds. General education is not an obstacle to their readiness for these careers—it is the foundation that ensures all students, regardless of their starting point, develop the skills and knowledge they need to succeed. Cutting General Education is not simply a scheduling or cost issue; it is a matter of educational equity.
It is worth noting that ELWL and other CASE faculty who are invested in helping students meet the General Education SLOs have already demonstrated their willingness to work creatively to meet the financial and time constraints students face. Participation in initiatives such as C4 and Determined Dawgs reflects a genuine commitment to student success. The collaborative development of HVAC courses 451 and 499 — designed to align with the university’s Writing Across the Curriculum/Writing in the Disciplines (WAC/WID) expectations
This demonstrates that programs can integrate writing and communication instruction within their own courses without eliminating General Education requirements. The fact that many programs have chosen to stop such WAC/WID courses and have their students take 300-level English courses recognizes the need for students to have that intensive upper-level writing experience. Faculty are not resistant to change; we are resistant to change that bypasses evidence and expertise.
In addition, MTA was an agreement designed to encourage the transition from 2-year to 4-year programs. Other universities do this; for example, Western Michigan University’s approach to General Education is that, in addition to the MTA requirements, students must take “six hours of 3000-4000 level General Education course work from the distribution areas plus one baccalaureate-level writing course (Proficiency 2).”
We respectfully but urgently call upon the President, the Provost, and the Board of Trustees to pause this proposal and reappoint a restructured committee — one that includes a broader and more representative range of stakeholders. A university committee determining changes of this magnitude must include faculty, staff, and administrators who bring genuine expertise in general education, SLOs, assessment, and equity, and who are committed to research and evidence.
What will truly serve our students is a deliberate, inclusive, and data-driven process that prepares them for careers and for life and honors Ferris State’s identity.
Sincerely,
Debra K. Courtright-Nash; Tina L Arduini; Roxanne Cullen; Denise D Cosper; K.M. Lewis; Tab M London; Lucero Flores-Paez; Deirdre Fagan; David W Marquard; Daniel E Noren; Sarah Rescoe; Gustavo Rodriguez; Philip Savage; Melissa S. Smith; Garrett M. Stack; Thomasin K. Stoffer; Bernadette Fox Swinkunas; Jonathan J Taylor; Heather D Pavletic; and Eric J Warner.