After Dean of Arts and Sciences Adam Jaffe presented his proposal for restructuring the curriculum at a special faculty meeting on Oct. 28, the prevailing sentiment was one of disapproval -both in the student and faculty ranks. Some, however, did show support for Jaffe's comprehensive recommendations.Calling for the phasing out of such departments as the linguistics program, the Ph.D program in music composition and parts of the classical studies department, as well as reductions of the Near Eastern and Judaic Studies and the physics departments, Jaffe suggested re-channeling academic funding to endorse the introduction of courses in fields such as East Asian economics, urban politics and Korean.

Prof. Leonard Muellner (CLAS) said that though he realizes the need for the University to develop, certain foundational courses such as Ancient Greek, which he teaches, must remain intact.

"We certainly aren't interested in keeping the university from innovating," Muellner said. But Muellner said that the Jaffe neglected to include the two most important and affected constituents in his decision-the faculty and the students.

Prof. Bernadette Brooten (NEJS) agreed with Muellner, adding that while cuts should be made, Jaffe must consider three important issues-the foundational areas, such as Greek, the University's prominent programs such as its prize-winning music department and the exact costs of the hiring and firing of faculty.

Brooten also said that it is important for a university of Brandeis' size to offer a range of courses rather than simply gearing all of the courses toward one specialty.

"Our niche is a small, liberal arts research university," Brooten said. "We need to maintain breadth of students in the future who, for example, want to study business, will not see a reason to spend so much in tuition to study at Brandeis rather than attending one of the business schools connected to corporate entities."

Other professors expressed their concerns with eliminating some departments and courses, but understood the situation in which Jaffe found himself.

Prof. Marc Brettler (NEJS) said that despite the underdeveloped state of the University's pre-professional programs, students have found their liberal arts education enriching for their graduate school applications.

"I do not believe that pre-professional studies at Brandeis are very strong and this does not bother me," Brettler said. "Brandeis students with their excellent liberal arts background do not, to the best of my knowledge, have any problems being accepted to the best professional schools."

Brettler said that he realizes and respects Jaffe's goal to make Brandeis a cutting-edge university and that perhaps having some of the proposed cuts by way of attrition-and not necessarily in the short term-on departments that have not grown in "logical manners."

Prof. Eric Hill (THA) agreed with being concerned over the loss of critical courses, but also said that that the campus should not be so quick to judge the administration so early in the process.

"No one wants to see important things cut due to redistribution of resources and no one knows an easy way of making decisions that will directly impact on the University in important ways in the long run," Hill said. "I think it's unfair to judge the process or second-guess it before it has a chance to work."

Those of the faculty who agreed with Jaffe's initiative spoke primarily to the boons to their own departments and the larger plan rather than about those departments getting harmed as a product.

Prof. Gary Jefferson (ECON) said that it would be more of an issue if the professional schools within Brandeis would depend on the curriculum restructuring that would take place within the college.

"As a procedural exercise, I think this is very important," Jefferson said. "I guess one issue I would raise that was not discussed is how the School of Arts and Sciences fits into the overall University budget. We have three professional schools-IBS, Heller and Rabb...so I think the professional schools should be able to carry their own weight and hopefully be net contributors to the School of Arts and Sciences."

Prof. John Schrecker (HIST), the chair of the East Asian Studies program, said that he supports curriculum reform, especially his program-one that, to him, has long been overlooked.

"I think it's wonderful that [Jaffe] wants to develop East Asian Studies," Schrecker said. "It covers one of the great civilizations in human history and one of the most dynamic areas in that world today. We have a vibrant East Asian Studies program and a few appointments would really put us over the top."

Student responses ranged from satisfaction with the addition of certain appointments to opposition to the removal of certain ones that they see as critical.

"I understand that to add a new program you have to cut pre-existing programs, but [Jaffe] needs to take more time considering which programs are integral to a liberal arts education and which are superfluous," Aaron Gaynor '07 said.

Marc Braunstein '06 said that though he considers himself more occupied with pre-professional courses, he still has an appreciation of more traditional disciplines.

"I think classics are essential because it is fundamental to a complete liberal arts education," Braunstein said. "As an economics major and a pre-med, I focus my studies mainly on math and science. However, I just as equally enjoy the creative art of thinking and the expansion of ideas."

Katherine S. Kim '05 praised Jaffe for introducing more East Asian studies courses.

"I feel like Jaffe's decision to add in [East Asian studies courses] is great step," Kim said. "It's been a long-awaited move and I am excited to see this new change.