Compilation of Upperclass Focus Group Reports—Fall 2002

IHUM Focus Group #16

Facilitator: X

Note-taker: Y

Group characteristics: The group was made up of six students. Two were males, four were females, five were juniors and one was a senior, and five were white and one was Asian. In addition, everyone participating in the focus group had a non-humanities major. There were two psychology majors (one with a double major in communications and one in a combined program with computer science), two electrical engineers, and two biology majors (one with a minor in creative writing).

Overview: I found it difficult to lead the students to separate what an IHUM lecture/section should be, and what it actually was. Part of this was because, as one student said, “I am not really sure what the point is of IHUM.” This seemed to be a theme throughout, as students kept on moving away from the “should” question, bringing it to the actual level. Some general findings include: there was little difference in lectures and sections for the fall and winter/spring classes; IHUM should and does serve to introduce students to new ideas and concepts; and there is a social element that was important to the class, as well as an academic: IHUM gave freshmen the opportunity to meet new people in their class and “bond” over a shared experience, one of the only shared experiences offered to Stanford freshmen.

1. What purposes do you think a good IHUM lecture should serve? [are these purposes different for fall and winter/spring quarters?]

There was general consensus that the IHUM lectures serve a few purposes, both academic and otherwise. Academically, IHUM lectures should help students understand the readings. Professors should help students to think critically about new and difficult readings, and help them see new and different viewpoints. Many students felt that this was their first “real” college course, and it was good to see a split between high school and college in the expectations professors had for students’ abilities to analyze and think critically about information and texts. Students also agreed that IHUM lectures should expose freshmen to new ideas and subjects.

A good IHUM lecture should be centered around a theme or “purpose.” When it was brought up, all of the students voiced agreement with the idea that IHUM lectures must focus on a central theme, and should be tied together somehow. Without this, most students admitted to failing to attend lecture.

The students generally agreed that lecture was not a time for student interaction with the professor – this is something that did and should occur during sections, not in lectures.

Every single student voiced the strong opinion that the lecturer “makes or breaks” the lecture. Although this makes sense, it became apparent that this holds even more true for the IHUM lectures because these are relatively inexperienced college students reading very difficult works. If the lecturer is hard to understand or doesn’t put effort into engaging the students, students get bored and frustrated.

Lastly, and this applies to the whole discussion, students said that there was virtually no difference between the fall and winter/spring classes (both lectures and sections). They agreed that professors and classes could get more in depth about the topics in the two-quarter segment, but because most students switched from one topic to another for the two segments, there was no building up on a base of knowledge from the fall to the winter/spring. The only difference (besides length, and therefore the ability to get more in depth) was that there should be, and was, a different expectation for the quality of work that could be produced by a freshman in the beginning of her fall quarter and at the end of her spring quarter.

2. What purposes do you think an effective IHUM section should serve? [are these purposes different for fall and winter/spring sections?]

Students agreed that the section should serve as a time to discuss the concepts and ideas discussed in lecture and found in the texts. Sections should be interactive and be a forum for discussion and thought. All students agreed that the Teaching Fellow should serve as a moderator and ask the section thought-provoking questions that challenge them. The students seemed to all agree that they wanted to be challenged in their sections, and that the best sections were those in which the TF threw out difficult topics from the reading and lead them in a discussion.

Again, all the students agreed that the TF could “make or break” the section. If the TF didn’t care or had not prepared, the section was tedious and hard to stomach. There was also a significant appreciation for TFs who were expert in the field, but were able to bring it to the students’ level.

3. What kind of skills do you think you should learn in an IHUM course? [different for fall and winter/spring?]

There was not much agreement among the students about what skills they did learn in the course, or what skill IHUM should teach you. A few students felt that they learned how to write better, while others felt that they learned how to write for a specific teacher or a specific style. However, all agreed that learning how to write for a specific TF with a certain style is important for college survival, as most students end up having to do this for many classes in their time at Stanford. Because most students felt that IHUM was graded a little more liberally than their other classes, this gave them a chance for a sort of trial and error. (It is important to note that there was discrepancy in the grading methods of different TFs and in different classes, so not all students had this lenient grading for their first college experience.) Similarly, students learned how to determine what reading they had to do, and what reading they could get away with not completing.

4. How would you describe your fall quarter IHUM experience in light of questions 1-3?

Most students could not differentiate between fall and winter/spring IHUM classes, so this following summary will serve to answer questions 4 and 5 (fall and winter/spring). Also, there is a good deal of description about the students’ experiences in questions 1-3.

All of the students enjoyed the IHUM classes – or at least believed that they are good for freshmen to take, although many thought that it would be better if they were just two quarters. Students appreciated the choice-structure of the classes, and thought that if IHUM is going to continue being three quarters long, it should have another choice for the third quarter. Many students believed that it is good to give freshmen some structure, so they have a class they have to take for a certain amount of units. It gives them a base. Others disagreed, saying that in the quarter in which they had to take IHUM and the writing requirement, there was very little time left for electives (especially for those on the pre-med track or in the sciences.) Some students suggested that the program be shortened to two quarters, and have the writing requirement be the third part of the series.

All of the students reiterated that the professors and TFs are the most important aspects of the classes, and that there was a good deal of inconsistency in the grading and quality of TFs and Professors. The students suggested that the IHUM staff do a more thorough job of screening the Professors and TFs to insure that they are good to teach freshmen. Included in this description would be TFs who care and are “not just there to help them get a job at Stanford,” and professors and TFs who remember that the freshmen have never had a class in these subjects before at the college level. As a result, professors and TFs should refrain from using complex language about the topic that freshmen won’t understand, and they should try to remember what it was like to be a freshmen and consider that when constructing the courses and grading the work.

5. To what extent did your IHUM experience influence your choice of major or of any other humanities courses you have taken?

None of the students ended up in the major in which they took their IHUM course. One student almost did, he said, and has taken a number of other courses in the same field as his IHUM course. Another student said that the IHUM course opened her eyes and made her want to do a minor in a non-science based discipline, since she was a science major.

IHUM Focus Group #17

Facilitator: A

Note taker: B

Attendance: 4

One of the four students had a lot to say and tended to dominate conversation. To get a sense of individual experiences, each student is labeled by a letter a through d.

What purposes do you think a good I-HUM lecture should serve (are these different for fall and winter/ spring?)

§ There seemed to be a diverse range of answers to the lectures. One student in particular was much more positive and thought the lectures were engaging and stimulated thought. Another still to this day did not see a point in her IHUM courses and felt that there were no clear objectives or reason to take the classes so it did not engage her or inspire her to do the reading and go to lecture.

§ Most agreed that lectures should serve to introduce you to college, to break you in since its one of the classes you have to take. It’s one of students’ first impressions and it is where you might meet new people.

§ Everyone also seemed to agree that the quality of the lecturer was critical. Most really enjoyed at least one of their professors in their 3 quarter experience. However for those lectures that were not stimulating students were not compelled to go. 3 out of 4 students commented on how it was easy to get through the class and achieve the same grade whether you went to all or only a quarter of the lectures. The work relied more heavily on the reading and your ability to synthesize and critique material in section and the papers the students produced. It was evident that there was little accountability for going to lecture.

§ Some students enjoyed their lectures especially those that were more entertaining or engaging such as talking about the football game or other events more relevant to the students’ immediate lives. Another student commented that he didn’t think it was a good goal to be entertaining or cater specifically to the new student or freshman. That was actually belittling and didn’t feel like a real and rigorous college course. He thought students took “fun” lectures less seriously and that courses should be based on a backbone of canonical knowledge. The lax or inconsistent grading contributed to this feeling or “dumbing down” as well.

§ There were mixed feelings about the need for requirements like IHUM. Most thought it was good to have but did not need to be 3 full quarters. Some felt that there needed to be more diversity in the choices and the course content – that it was too based in western classical thought. Another student felt that there weren’t enough structured requirements that really teach the canon compared to other schools (i.e. Columbia) that have a core program with specific goals clear to the students. Another really enjoyed specialized canons of modernist thought, etc.

§ The quality of lectures also varied by class. Most liked Class X, however everyone nodded that most people did not like Class Y.

What purposes do you think an effective I-HUM sections should serve? (Are these purposes different for fall and winter/ spring lectures?)

§ Everyone agreed that the purpose of section was to discuss the reading and the lecture. It was helpful as a freshman to be able to discuss the lecture especially with a lot of dense and lengthy reading.

§ It was also stated that it helps to have a section leader who knows what they’re talking about. The TF’s could make or break the section. Some of the students claimed that their TF’s acted outwardly bitter and didn’t want to be teaching freshman IHUM. It seemed like a demotion for some of the post –docs and they made it apparent to the students taking away from the quality of the experience.

§ Other skills that the sections help impart was accountability for reading, ability to facilitate discussion and the ability to learn to speak and listen in class, so it was good training ground for sections and classes in the future.

§ The quality of the TFs varied from some not knowing the material at all to some who seemed to have more knowledge of the material and a better ability to teach than the actual professor. Partly that may be due to the nature of having PhDs as section leaders. If the content of the course is directly related to TFs interests then it will be a better section. If it’s not, it’s likely that the apathy and lack of knowledge some of the TFs display will adversely affect section and students learning.

§ Everyone agreed that they would rather have a grad student that was dynamic and knowledgeable of the professor and material then a bitter post-doc who feels like they were given a step down to teach IHUM.

What kinds of skills (e.g. reading, writing, critical analysis, etc.) do you think you should learn in an I-HUM course? (Should you learn different things in fall and winter/ spring I-HUM courses?)

§ Again there was a diverse range of responses. 3 of the 4 said that it definitely helped their writing and to read more effectively and to be able to employ critical analysis. At the same time 2 also suggested that it did not really “teach” them any skills and that the writing part was out of sync with the required writing class they took. While one class made the students churn out a number of papers per quarter, the writing course took the whole quarter to go through the process of writing one.

§ One student expanded on that to say that the real skills that she learned in IHUM was the ability to draw quotes from something you haven’t read, to write a paper in one night and to learn how to get by without going to lecture.

§ One suggestion was to create a more rigorous core by combining the ideas and structure of SLE—(Structure of Liberal Ed) with IHUM classes.

§ Another response related that it was hard to talk about measuring skills and whether they were gained from IHUM since the skills come bit by bit from various classes and aspects of life. It’s not a linear progression

How would you describe your fall quarter I-HUM experience in light of your answers to questions 1-3 above?

§ All the students agreed that it was a mix bag in terms of their experiences and that the fall quarter did not feel any different form the winter or spring in terms of intensity, structure, or rigor. None felt that that the IHUM courses built upon each other or were well integrated.

§ Most felt that the material was not well integrated between and across courses and there didn’t seem to be good communication between professors who were teaching a two part winter/spring course. There was a lack of real connection or meaning for the students in many of these classes.

How would you describe your winter/ spring quarter I-HUM experience in light of these answers?

§ Two students felt that there winter and spring quarter classes were virtually the same in content, flow, and structure. The other two students felt that they took two completely different classes.

To what extent did your I-HUM experience influence your choice of your major or of any other humanities courses your have taken?

§ Three of the four students went on to study humanities in some form or another. The following were the majors reported by the four students: a= symbolic systems with probable minor in philosophy, b=political science, c=Slavic Studies, d=English)

§ One of the students noted that most people have interests coming in and that’s how one picks their IHUM class. So it wouldn’t be that surprising if it’s related to the current major. Another stated that they didn’t think about interests as it was a freshman requirement at the time.

§ One student didn’t think the experience was inspiring and was pointless to her future education. She and others were more concerned with skills and practical knowledge then and wanted more of an explanation or grounding as to the purpose of the courses.

§ Another student was especially inspired by IHUM, still keeps in contact with one of the professors and continued on to be an English major. Another benefit to IHUM was that it was a chance to try out some classes that you didn’t necessarily have a lot of knowledge or interest in.

§ Lastly 3 of the 4 students agreed that IHUM did not need to be 3 full quarters – that the same objectives could be met in just 2 quarters of work opening up the opportunity to have a lighter load or explore other classes outside of IHUM earlier on.

IHUM Focus Group #18

Facilitator: C

Notetaker: D

Attendance: 5

General Comments of Interest:

I-HUM tries to please everyone [by trying to be broad and interesting], but in doing so pleases no one.
When I gave a bit of the history of this type of requirement at Stanford, students thought it should be re-packaged and give a different name every “generation” to absolve it of the stigma that will inevitably get associated with it. They say there’s a fundamental difficulty with forcing all students to do one thing and the program can never get over that.
Three interesting advantages of the general I-HUM program that students identified:

Opportunity to meet and get to know classmates. Even if I-HUM is viewed as negative, it is a topic for bonding.
It teaches you how to skim readings and that itself is an important skill for succeeding college work.
It teaches you that it is important to tailor writing to TF’s proclivities, which is also an important college skill.

What purposes do you think a good I-HUM lecture should serve (Are these different for fall and winter/ spring?)

In general, these students would like I-HUM to have a larger selection of narrower topics. One mentioned that “no matter which I-HUM you take, its all essentially the same stuff” and others agreed. To them, a good I-HUM lecture would be specific to a discipline/ topic. Two students in particular continued to reiterate this point throughout and advocated for Area 1 requirements to be set up like the other area requirements.
Similarly, an I-HUM lecture should be based on the classic texts of a discipline.
The group debated one student’s proposal to just have section meetings instead of lectures. The positives would be smaller groups and only one instructor (which would lend coherence). Most did not believe the logistics of this idea could be worked out in practice, but liked it.
The group also debated the possibility of having fall being a non-graded (or draft-graded) term. More than half liked the idea and thought it would give professors the opportunity to establish high standards without making the consequences overly intimidating for new students. Two in the group believed this would just make I-HUM “more of a blow off”.
Only one of 5 students thought they needed to read before lectures, though all thought there should be some mechanism that made students feel more compelled to do the readings.

What purposes do you think an effective I-HUM sections should serve? (are these purposes different for fall and winter/ spring lectures?)

· The consensus was that section should raise controversial issues and generate interest in the topic. Students felt there needed to be a skilled facilitator who knew how to raise the interesting issues and challenge people’s ideas. Too often that didn’t happen [because section leaders are hired to lead more than one section and the sections are not in their specific areas of interest].

· Four agree that section needs to be more closely integrated with the lecture and report that theirs were never aligned. One student mentioned that the lecture/ section divide did not prepare her for future classes, where she was surprised to find alignment across lecture and section.

What kinds of skills (e.g., reading, writing, critical analysis, etc.) do you think you should learn in an IHUM course? [should you learn different things in fall and winter/spring IHUM courses?]

· The program needs to coordinate requirements better across I-HUM’s. Some require ten-page papers while others require 2-page papers. This is a problem on two levels: (1) students emerge with different types of writing skills and (2) students often choose based on the easier I-HUM’s in winter/ spring.

· One student suggests that fall could be more skill based and winter/ spring more discussion based, but others don’t think it could be that clearly defined.

· All agree that I-HUM needs to be coordinated with the writing requirement.

· When asked: Of reading, writing and critical analysis, what did you get out of I-HUM? Two students responded: Nothing. Two mentioned that it improved their writing skills. In the end, they all agreed that what it mainly gave them was “exposure”.

How would you describe your fall quarter I-HUM experience in light of your answers to questions 1-3 above?

Several note that they had no idea of how to pick an I-HUM coming into Stanford. It was unclear which I-HUM was related to which academic disciplines.
Students seemed to focus on how their lecturers and section leaders often disagreed on interpretations of readings. While some thought this was evidence of a problem with the I-HUM program, others saw it as giving them important insight into the reality of academia.
All agreed that the fall I-HUM open house was a good idea.
All students had the experience of multiple lecturers, but some felt it enriched the experience but one said it made him more confused as to the purpose of the class.

How would you describe your winter/ spring quarter I-HUM experience in light of these answers?

· Three students thought their winter/ spring experience was much better and pointed to their increased understanding of “what they were getting into” as a reason for the improved experience.

· Students cited: knowing the professors, knowing the TF’s, knowing the requirements, and having more specific course options as reasons why winter/ spring was a better experience than fall.

· Section leader was considered the key to whether the I-HUM experience is good or not. Four of 5 agree with this.

To what extent did your I-HUM experience influence your choice of your major or of any other humanities courses your have taken?

· Students were mixed on how substantially I-HUM influenced them. Two said it had no influence at all because they knew they didn’t want to pursue the humanities. Three thought it was generally a “good requirement to have”.

· Two students thought it was a good opportunity for them to investigate something that fell outside of their primary academic interest area and read the things “any Stanford graduate should know”.

· One student wished she had taken the I-HUM that was most closely related to her current major, political science.

· I-HUM should not be 5 units for two reasons (1) it restricts the other course you can take and (2) its not 5 units of work.

IHUM Focus Group #19

Facilitator: M

Notetaker: N

Attendance: 3

General Comments of interest:

· Student A: People used to say in my dorm that IHUM was a conspiracy by the Silicon Valley Techies to get people turned off from humanities.

· Student B: If you can do anything about this program, you need to turn off the negativity that surrounds it. The negativity coming in turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

1. What purposes do you think a good I-HUM lecture should serve (Are these different for fall and winter/ spring?)

Students need lecturers to give them the general context for the subject area in the fall. Fall is the time for “general themes”. For example, some professors started out by diving right into the specifics of a certain philosopher’s work, but students felt they needed to understand a little bit about the goals of philosophy and where that philosopher was situated in the history of philosophy first. All students in attendance agreed that fall should be a time to learn the fundamentals of one discipline within the humanities.
One of the students said that the fall lectures should be closely tied to the readings so that students develop a disciplined understanding of how to analyze literature. In the later terms, it would be okay if lecturers strayed more from the text to talk about real-world implications.
Two of the three believed that I-HUM was structured so that people could get through with skipping the “less interesting” readings. The third participant disagreed and said she couldn’t have gotten away with not reading for either lecture or session because both were based on specific passages in the text rather than broad themes.
All students noted that lectures were very teacher-centered, with very little time for interaction. Perhaps surprisingly, all thought this was good and necessary, in that it provided the foundation and structure they desired.
All three students had the experience of at least one quarter where the lecture was taught by multiple professors and all thought that enriched their learning.

2. What purposes do you think an effective I-HUM sections should serve? (Are these purposes different for fall and winter/ spring lectures?)

a. Sections are useful for teaching the norms of behavior in a college-level seminar. All agreed they were a good opportunity to delve deeply into classic text passages and discuss them with peers and “expert” section leaders.

b. To them, a good section “fully depended on the quality of your TF”. They thought the purpose was to have a provocative discussion and felt much of the responsibility for making the section provocative fell to the TF. An effective I-HUM section would need to be led by someone who is excited about the material, knowledgeable and passionate. One student stayed with the same TF all three terms (though this required her to go to the trouble of petitioning the registrar). The others wished they had found a TF that would have been worth that effort.

c. Students experienced varying degrees of congruence between their lectures and sections, but none seemed to be bothered by this. To them, the two parts served different purposes and it was only an added bonus when a section leader would begin class by asking, “What happened in lecture?” and build from there.

d. Two students (both seniors) voiced trouble remembering their fall I-HUM.

3. What kinds of skills (e.g. reading, writing, critical analysis, etc.) do you think you should learn in an I-HUM course? 9 should you learn different things in fall and winter/ spring I-HUM courses?)

a. Two students noted that it would be nice if you could compartmentalize certain types of skills, like learning to do critical analysis, into fall quarter, but didn’t believe it was possible. In reality, I-HUM works with other courses to give you all of those skills and it happens over all three terms.

b. One did try to clarify that fall quarter should be relatively more skills focused, while the next two terms should be more application focused.

c. All three agreed, however, that I-HUM need not be three terms (two were more emphatic than the other).

d. All agreed that I-HUM was redundant with the university writing requirement.

4. How would you describe your fall quarter I-HUM experience in light of your answers to questions 1-3 above?

a. Two students switched topic areas after fall quarter and one remained with the same sequence for the whole year. All had a hard time distinguishing their experiences into separate categories for fall and winter/ spring. They thought that division was “arbitrary”.

b. Two students commented that it was the quality of the students in the section

that made the I-HUM experience relatively stronger or weaker. One of those students was an athlete who said that every year there is an “athlete I-HUM” which she was in during her fall term. In her words, “it was painful to talk, to get engaged, to care about the material.” After that, her experience improved because she left that group.

5. How would you describe your winter/ spring quarter I-HUM experience in light of these answers?

· One student talked specifically about her winter/ spring I-HUM, Course X, and noted that they tried to cover too much material. A second said her winter/ spring I-HUM, Course Y, was interesting but she had little to contribute about the content. The third student felt her winter/ spring was not markedly different from her fall.

6. To what extent did your I-HUM experience influence your choice of your major or of any other humanities courses your have taken?

· Students agreed that the I-HUM was good breadth for people with “Science-y” tendencies because everyone needs to learn critical reading and writing.

· The two students who felt strongly about abbreviating the length of I-HUM said that the requirement had restricted them in their process of exploring potential majors early in college. In that sense, they felt it had negatively impacted them.

· One student characterized I-HUM as an “exalted high school AP English class” based on an outdated idea that everyone needs to learn Western Civilization. She went on to say that most students at Stanford had studied enough of the basics in high school and didn’t need it repeated. This echoed the general sentiment of the group with regard to course content.

IHUM Focus Group #20

Facilitator: P

Notetaker: Q

Attendance: 3

General Comments of Interest:

· This session was far more positive than the other three I attended, although students still acknowledged the negative I-HUM stigma.

· One student felt strongly that I-HUM could be shortened to 2 quarters and the others did not disagree.

· They saw very few differences between the purposes of Fall vs. Winter/ Spring. They all saw it as a continuum.

What purposes do you think a good I-HUM lecture should serve (Are these different for fall and winter/ spring?)

All students had the experience of having multiple professors for one lecture and felt they benefited from the experience (particularly when the professors were from two different departments, said one).
Students noted that I-HUM had two distinct purposes: (1) to give “techies” a touch of exposure to humanities and (2) to prepare those interested in humanities for their future coursework. One thought these two “tracks” should be separated, but all recognized that such a separation would be difficult in practice.
There was some discussion of the In the end, the consensus was that fall would be the best time for broader course content and by spring course offerings could be narrower. At the outset of the conversation, two students felt that all of the I-HUMs should be essentially the same (an opportunity to get exposed to classic texts and critical analysis) and liked that course topics were very broad. One student disagreed and thought it would be more helpful to narrow topics down.
All three had the experience of having a direct lecture with little interaction and felt they needed that (rather than some interaction during lecture).
All three felt that course offerings should be broad and interdisciplinary in the fall and get progressively narrower and more subject-specific by spring.
All three agreed on the following overall purposes for I-HUM:

Should demonstrate what scholarly thought looks and sounds like
Should (and is) more about skill building than learning a subject
Should expose students to non-text sources of learning. All students had the experience of attending films, opera, and other cultural events as part of their I-HUM and thought that enriched the course.
Should be taught by inspiring professors who are excited about the topic

Corollary: I-HUM should strive to engage students and interest them in the material (perhaps more than other courses because its required)

Should make the purposes and goals of I-HUM more transparent than they have
Should provide more information about I-HUM prior to the start of Fall quarter

What purposes do you think an effective I-HUM sections should serve? (Are these purposes different for fall and winter/ spring lectures?)

a. Two students felt strongly that sections should be smaller, particularly in the fall quarter. However, the third student had a small section and characterized it as a painful experience because his classmates were reluctant to talk.

b. Two students felt that section should be more structured in the fall, and progressively less so in winter and spring, but the third student appreciated that it was flexibly structured all three quarters.

c. Students debated the length of time they spent in session. Two thought it was too long, but the third appreciated the length. All noted that problems with the length were related to the fact that “TF’s make or break session.”

d. All agreed on the following purposes of section:

o Should be about fostering dialogue and setting norms for college-level discussion

o The TF should be skilled at facilitating discussion and should not treat section as their own opportunity to lecture.

What kinds of skills (e.g., reading, writing, critical analysis, etc.) do you think you should learn in an IHUM course? [Should you learn different things in fall and winter/spring IHUM courses?]

· They see skill development as the central purpose of I-HUM.

· All three students agreed that there was an overlap between I-HUM and the writing requirement and all felt that writing was taught differently (incompatibly) by instructors in these two sets of courses.

· All three felt that I-HUM had helped their speaking and academic discourse skills and believed this was a valuable skill that the sequence could provide.

How would you describe your fall quarter I-HUM experience in light of your answers to questions 1-3 above?

The topics covered seemed to help them get specific about what purposes the program should serve. Basically, they gave better answers to questions 1 and 2 when we got to this point in the focus group. Thus, I included the answers they gave to question 4 in my notes for question 1.

How would you describe your winter/ spring quarter I-HUM experience in light of these answers?

· See comment for question 4.

· One student spoke very negatively about having three professors [in the same field] for Winter and Spring. He felt it made the experience too narrow because they professors all offered essentially the same perspective.

To what extent did your I-HUM experience influence your choice of your major or of any other humanities courses your have taken?

· Responses followed no significant pattern on this one.

· Two students said, “I loved my I-HUM”, but the response had different origins. One student, who took Course X, came to Stanford planning to major in engineering and became a history major largely because of his experience. The other student loved gaining exposure to something so different from his core area of interest, the sciences.

· The third student was an English major but didn’t think I-HUM influenced his choice.