ASCnet

Details

Date

2006-05-19

Time

Location

Agenda

9:00- 11:00 a.m 200 Bricker Hall

1. Announcements from chair

 

2. Approval of meeting minutes

 

3. Continuation of discussion of McHale recommendations:
1. 180 credit hours degree requirement
2. Oversight of GEC
3. Addition of "Moral Reasoning" category and proposal to double-count courses

Notes

Present: Adelson, Smith, Vassey, Krissek, Hobgood, Mumy, Andereck, Lowry, Childs, Collier, Breitenberger, Lemberger, Schoen, Shanda, Wanzer, Petry, Masters, Mockabee, Harvey, Royster, Mercerhill, Moses, Seloni

 

1. Updates from the Chair:
1. 2 Senate meetings left in quarter – May 24 and June 7

 

2. Discussion of Andereck/Childs proposal
1. Proposal to create “base-line” GEC requirements, decrease Breadth area by 15 credits then “add back” options:

1.       Add back 2 courses in GEC Breadth area or add back 3 courses in GEC Breadth area

2.       Courses added back in 2 of the 3 categories (Natural Science, Social Science, Arts and Humanities)

3.       At least 1 course should be outside major’s Breadth Area

4.       Upper division courses substitute

a.       preference is to encourage creation of upper-division GEC approved courses or student petition

5.       Minor that is ASC approved or only minors in ASC or minors chosen by departments

6.       Completion of 2^nd major

2. Humanities would like to add back 3 courses and support minor/major option
3. SBS prefers add back 3 courses

                                                               i.            Concern over implementation expressed as well as the need to know more information about how minor/2^nd major substitution would work

4. Arts

                                                               i.            minor/2^nd major: minors already double count GEC courses, feeling that they don’t allow for breadth

                                                             ii.            reducing by 1 course is acceptable (“add on 2” option)

                                                            iii.            if courses that make up 180 hours are the right courses, then Arts is ok with reductions

                                                           iv.            interest in base plan, but request that resolution say 1 course in VPA and 1 in Literature or Cultures & Ideas

5. Humanities would likely be open to 1 course in VPA and 1 in Literature with Cultures & Ideas being more of an elective category
6. Question of whether there should be some distribution restrictions to keep students from taking 4 courses in one category in Breadth
7. Question posed: If members had to chose now, how would they vote for the following?

                                                               i.            At least 1 course must be outside Breadth area of major – 6 in favor

1.      Question of how this would be defined and whether courses should be pre-packaged to be more coherent to students as in minors

                                                             ii.            Courses must be from at least 2 Breadth Areas – 7 yes

                                                            iii.            No restrictions on courses “added back” – 2 yes

8. Question of why all courses wouldn’t be outside of major in order to achieve breadth

                                                               i.            This might affect pre-requisites on majors which currently count in GEC

9. Noted that real impulse for this change is to help students feel like the GEC is more applicable
10. Question of how many students have a minor or double major – educated guess is that it is frequent but not the majority, probably less than 1/3
11. Noted that there is a limit as to how many hours can be taken in any 1 department
12. Question of possibility of departments opening seats to non-majors in upper-division courses – noted that many do not have enough seats
13. Minor option would encourage student to think about minors early in career instead of randomly at end of career
14. Strong majority of committee feels that upper-division courses need to be approved for GEC status
15. “Add back” option

                                                               i.            Noted that we want students to graduate with many ways of thinking/knowing/feeling, therefore students should be free to chose courses that will complement their major

                                                             ii.            Restricting courses to outside the major becomes complicated for interdisciplinary/interdepartmental majors

                                                            iii.            Question of how we would asses upper-division courses if not vetted by GEC committees – general feeling is that if they are approved as GEC it would work easily via learning outcomes – this is the preference

16. Minors lists provided to members

                                                               i.            Noted that some minors have GEC restrictions that would affect how they are used in the substitution option

17. Members asked to comment on “add back 2” versus “add back 3” options

                                                               i.            Feeling that Professional Colleges and B.S. degrees are being given a lot of flexibility with base-line proposal, especially when provided the option of determining what form “add back” takes

                                                             ii.            “Add back 2” allows decrease in required hours to 186

                                                            iii.            Arts faculty would like to know why Foreign Language is not part of the base option since it is the only area that requires 4 courses

                                                           iv.            Suggested that the decrease to 180 come from electives

                                                             v.            Question of whether “add back” would harm Natural Science courses

1.      MAPS perceives this as a “brave new world” that might create incentive to create courses students want to take and noted that everyone will face this, not just Natural Sciences

2.      Noted that Natural Science credits proposed puts OSU more in line with peer institutions

3.      Noted that OSU is at the bottom of Foreign Language contact hours compared to peer institutions

                                                           vi.            Committee feels strong need to review current credit hour system – why 5 hours verses 4 as standard?

                                                          vii.            Provost’s credits to graduate list provided to members – committee requests to have proportion of GEC to major hours reported

1.      UCLA requires 180 hours – their courses are mostly 4 hour courses, they decreased their general education and created more options like the Clusters

                                                        viii.            “Add back 2” provides breadth – “add back 3” provides marginal depth

1.      Students only get breadth if the current requirement of one from each category is kept

2.      Requiring 2 of the 3 categories adds flexibility

3.      Students who have pre-requisites for the major that count as GEC still benefit from the base-line proposal

4.      “Add back 2” – simply provides flexibility and decreases hours

                                                           ix.            Question posed: Why keep current GEC?

1.      Students need College level courses that provide different scholarly focus than same courses at High School level

a.       Noted that the base-line proposed provides the bare minimum for this

2.      OSU is below the number of hours peer institutions have for B.A. degrees

3.      Committee feels that it needs a more specific argument as to why we should keep the hours

a.       What courses are needed vs. argument that peers have a certain number of hours

4.      OSU students come from a different background than peers – many are 1^st generation, less traveled; we have to ensure that they are gaining the knowledge that other students have upon entering college

5.      Question of what our obligations to our students are; what skills/knowledge do they need to master?

                                                             x.            Motion: Endorse GEC categories through the creation of a base-line of Breadth area requirements for the B.A. (Natural Science, 15 credits; Social Science, 10 credits; Arts and Humanities, 10 credits), with further discussion of how additional credit requirements and flexibility will be addressed.

Motion approved – 5 yes, 2 opposed, 1 abstention

1.      Proposal reframes categories so they are more transparent with particular attention to Breadth category

2.      Senate should be sent list of additional “add back” options with a note that these are not voted on

3.      Suggested that a work plan be sent to Senate so that they know what is still to be discussed in CCI

4.      Suggested that Senate straw voted be taken so that CCI knows what the Senate thinks of proposal

5.      Concern expressed that the motion will confuse Senators because it contradicts previous resolutions passed by CCI

                                                           xi.            Minors in “add back” option – question of who decides what minors count

1.      Invite Senate to discuss this and other issues with options to provide more information for last CCI meeting

                                                          xii.            Inventory of main McHale discussions that have taken place in CCI:

1.      180 hours

2.      Structure of current GEC

3.      Clusters (discussion finished)

4.      Flexibility

5.      Oversight

                                                        xiii.            Proposed that a small work group meet to create a proposal that is more comprehensive to be brought forward at last CCI meeting

1.      Committee to provide written justifications of categories, credit hours and a short rationale of GEC

2.      Volunteers: Mark Shanda, Larry Krissek, Mike Vasey, Valerie Mockabee

                                                        xiv.            Randy Smith will provide an update to CAA regarding our status