* Minutes reorganized around categories for ease of processing McHale recommendations.
Present: Adelson, Vassey, Mockabee, Krissek, Shelton, Hobgood, Yerkes, Mumy, Andereck, Lowry, Childs, Collier, Petry, Breitenberger, Lenberger, Harvey, Masters, Schoen, Mercerhill
i. GEC goals are already embedded in the History major
ii. Department decided that historical study sequence was not necessary, which provides more choice to students
iii. Proposal keeps 100 and 300 level surveys
iv. Proposal allows any courses at 500 level (except capstone) to be taken as second course
v. Students will continue to work with advisors to decide appropriate courses, most students should still be advised to take the survey courses
vi. History of Art and other departments will be invited to provide courses for the category by proposing through the appropriate channels and gaining concurrence from History; GEC courses should be open to all students and therefore should not have prerequisites that prevent non-major students from taking
vii. Proposal is fully supported by History Curriculum Committee and received strong approval from History Department
viii. The 3 goals listed in McHale are embedded into this proposal
ix. Proposal is similar to current Honors practice
x. Some concern in Humanities that breadth foundation may be lost with the decrease in survey course requirements; History believes that skills such as how to research using historical documents, primary sources, etc should be priority over covering X number of years in history
xi. Proposal is excellent example of how assessment can be used to create creative, well thought-out programs and courses
xii. Section II of proposal will be sent forward to ASC Faculty Senate
xiii. CCI approved proposal unanimously
i.
ii. Will address how oversight can be achieved without adding a new layer to CAA
iii. CCI will be asked to work out details
i. There needs to be more understanding of importance/benefits of studying foreign language in the context of our global world
ii. McHale recommended each college choose what the Foreign Language requirement should be, Department feels that ASC should continue to set requirements and continue discussion with colleges opting out of requirement currently
iii. Would like to use assessment more to provide for needed information
iv. Open to discussions about 4th course – possibly creating decimalized versions that provide more apparent relevance to students
i. Minors are not substitutions for foreign language because they are fulfilling the requirements already
ii. Substitutions, perhaps for B.S. majors:
1. Culture course replacing 104 taught within the language; requirement would be 101-103, plus culture course, or possibly only to 103 for B.S. students; Use of Spanish Science journal (for instance) in Spanish 104 for science students could address specific needs
iii. Foreign Language Chairs object to 2 + 2 idea (2 courses in one language, 2 in another) – this process does note achieve the GEC goals for foreign language, or the National Standards
iv. MAPS would like students to be encouraged to take languages not offered in most High Schools
v. Question of whether it would be possible for Languages to teach more culture issues raised, along with suggestion that students who know they are going to grad school be allowed to chose more scholarly focused course
vi. Question of what Foreign Language does to promote other cultures that can’t be done elsewhere – would like to see assessment that demonstrates that 103 7 104 are equally adding to experience
vii. In light of McHale, suggestion made to re-examine International GEC category