COLUMN: Balancing business education

From Jeffrey Snyder's, "Snyde Remarks," Fall '98 From Jeffrey Snyder's, "Snyde Remarks," Fall '98 A few years ago, when I was weighing my college options and carefully considering one of life's most important decisions, I settled on the University of Pennsylvania for many reasons. Among them, the University exemplified a true balance. A balance between the beauty of a college campus and the opportunity found in a major city. A balance between the superb academics found only at an Ivy League institution and the fun atmosphere created by, among other things, one of the best Greek systems in the country. The Wharton School, which U.S. News & World Report ranked as the No. 1 undergraduate business program in the country, fails to adequately prepare students in many areas that prove crucial not only to business careers, but also to life in general. I find it deplorable to witness presentations that reflect a flawless knowledge of the business principles relative to the class, but are presented in broken English by a student who has difficulty looking up from a script long enough to make eye contact with the instructor or fellow students. It is equally unacceptable that students are allowed to submit papers for many courses in bullet-point form or with flagrant spelling and grammatical errors. They get away without having sufficient mastery of the English language to write a decent paper. And teaching assistants make little effort to improve the problem. In fact, many are particularly sympathetic because of their own language problems. The Wharton curriculum must be modified to ensure that students are not only able to crunch numbers and analyze financial statements upon graduation, but also can represent clients, write letters, memos and reports and possess the public speaking skills necessary to interact and make presentations in the business world. To deal with this problem, the school should start by encouraging more writing among its undergraduates. Without adding additional credit requirements, this could be achieved by instituting minimum writing requirements for certain core courses. Independent of specific instructors or concentrations, every student taking Marketing 101, for example, would write a 10-page paper that would be graded on writing quality as well as course-related criterion. Similar to the foreign language proficiency requirement, writing proficiency would need to be certified prior to graduation. This system could identify students who need further writing assistance and point them to the advising system or additional writing courses in the College of Arts and Sciences. Along the same lines, Wharton should, either in the same fashion described above or preferably through an additional course requirement, institute a public speaking requirement. Although a full course dedicated to the subject would be beneficial, the objective could be achieved through an individual speaking requirement as part of a core course. While a strong background in writing and public speaking cannot compensate for a lack of knowledge of business principles, it is an important part of what should be taught to students who aspire to succeed in business-related fields. The Wharton curriculum also fails in its obligation to teach the business leaders of the future to at least consider the ethical implications of business practices. Legal Studies 210 is currently the only course Wharton offers that deals with any ethical issues. This course, which debates the obligations of a corporate officer to shareholders and society as a whole, should absolutely be required for all Wharton undergraduates. In addition, students should have the opportunity to participate in units on the role ethics plays in their specific concentration. It is of paramount importance, for instance, that instructors address insider trading as a real ethical concern, rather than absorbing it into an abstract theory of market efficiency. In order to compensate for potential additional requirements, the curriculum could be modified to remove some of its more repetitive elements. For example, both Economics 002 and Finance 101 are requirements that focus on macroeconomic theory. Although the courses place emphasis in slightly different areas, the material is roughly the same and could be combined into one course. Of course there really would be no problem with simply adding a credit or two to the 37 already required. All students in the School of Engineering and Applied Science must take a minimum of 40 course units, so it would not be excessive to require Wharton students to take 38 or 39. On a final note, Wharton students would also benefit from seminars in golf, tennis and squash. Although I am not going to suggest that credit should be offered for such courses, it is not unreasonable to propose non-credit seminars in these areas. Many business transactions occur in informal settings such as the golf course and it is extremely helpful to be able to hold one's own in these settings. Some other schools, including Dartmouth College, require all students to take a physical education course for credit. Offerings range from swimming and tennis to downhill skiing. A more limited program could be viable at Penn. Although Wharton has earned its reputation by providing the best undergraduate business education available, it should not become complacent. There is room to further improve and to make changes to ensure that graduates receive the balanced education that only the University could provide.