1.	Many of the physicists prefer the pre-Rupp distribution requirements.
2.	Everyone feels writing is important but little agreement on what kind of writing or how (or even if) it should be required.
3.	Many felt admission should be used to solve (or help solve) many of the educational problems. Simply admit only people who have had calculus, science, foreign languages, and who can write well.
4.	Some mentioned that much of "general education" does and should take place outside of the formal classroom. Perhaps it could be done in conjunction with discussion of lectures, concerts, films, art, etc.
5.	The Brown model was not considered bad at all. There was at least one strong advocate of extreme freedom - "choose good students and let them do what they want." Other physicists agreed with a more moderate but similar view.
6.	When asked what they would do or contribute, they basically said little more than what they are doing now.
7.	Most felt there should be opportunities to explain ideas and methods, both in writing and verbally. However, there was little agreement as to how this would be done.
8.	Most felt that even with the selective admissions, our students have a very wide range of abilities that really complicates teaching science and engineering.
9.	Most agreed that it is in the applying of ideas and methods in a variety of courses and situations that real understanding takes place. For example, applying calculus in physics or in economics problem helps the student understand calculus better.

All in all, the group was very negative and discouraging. There was a fair amount of griping about the humanities and humanities majors. They seemed to feel the problems are all caused by others and they are fine. Most of the engineers said nothing.