By Mina Del Pilar
Staff Writer
First implemented in 2019, the Core Curriculum replaced the old general education requirement at Saint Martin’s University, and its aim was for students to learn outside of their disciplines for a broader perspective within a Benedictine framework of understanding. However, students have recently raised concerns about the actual workings of the Core in building their majors.
After ASSMU student representatives expressed concerns at a Board of Trustees meeting last year, they drafted a Core Curriculum Resolution in April, 2026. The resolution proposed improvements in the Core, including more clarity of objectives, consistency in teaching standards, consistency in course content, and better integration of the Benedictine hallmarks into course topics and improvement to COR100. The ASSMU senate voted unanimously for the resolution.
Both before and after passage, the ASSMU vice president met with the Core Director to discuss the students’ concerns. Several concerns were brought up, including the current iteration of the Core Curriculum not fitting with most majors, too many classes are cross-listed, and some classes, such as COR100, were confusing or unfulfilling.
Following the vote for the resolution, it made its way to the full faculty. At a September 2026 faculty meeting, some faculty were skeptical or unsure of the resolution’s criticisms and just what needed to change. But other faculty saw it as an opportunity to reevaluate how their teachings can make a greater positive impact on students.
This writer spoke with Dr. Kayla Blyman, the Faculty President, and she shared how the Core Committee was already dedicated to revisiting and revising learning objectives for the curriculum long before the ASSMU resolution passed. Dr. Blyman was aware of and present at board of trustee meetings in which student concerns were expressed. According to her, in order to make the changes the students are seeking the learning objectives have to be revisited and restructured. The curriculum’s evolution is highly dependent on them. Dr. Blyman said one of the goals of these changes is to implement the Core better overall, not necessarily the content of Core classes.
Core Director Barosky is currently on sabbatical. When this writer contacted him he was unsure of any progress that has been made addressing student concerns or when we can see changes to the curriculum go live. However in an email message he stated the resolution is “a part of a broader conversation about the Core that involves students, faculty, as well as university leadership.” After speaking with Dr. Blyman it appears that there is progress, even if it is currently not evident to wider members of the community. She has a plan to get feedback from student focus groups on the topic of the new learning objectives.
Still, many students remain dissatisfied with the content of Core courses–this writer spoke to some who cited COR100 as their main complaint, followed somewhat closely by other Core classes. Students pay and invest time for all courses of their degree whether related to major or general education. It is only natural that many in this current situation remain unsatisfied with the perceived lack of communication or updates regarding this process. But it appears there is potential for faculty and students to collaborate together in providing honest feedback and ample care to implement needed changes.
As the process of improving the Core moves forward, The Belltowers reporters will follow up with the Core Committee and Core Director about any changes to improve it consistent with their commitment to transparency and a quality education.
