Present: Adelson, Baker, Childs, Harden, Harvey, Hobgood, Hubin, Oltmann, Ryden, Trudeau, Vasey, Wyszomirski, Yerkes, Andereck, Breitenberger, Collier, Dutta, Francis, Mercerhill, Mockabee, Morgan, Mumy, Schoen, Smith, Wanzer
- Updates from the Chair:
- Senate to vote on 181 hours to degree Dec. 6
- CAA discussion of GEC Oversight and Clusters continued next week
- November 17 minutes approved
- Moral Reasoning Insight Panel – Don Hubin
- Panel looked at statements and objectives at other institutions but though that McHale objectives were ok – panel endorses the language of McHale
- Flagged course approach is best for implementation
- Concerned that GEC is large and complex
- Endorses option of allowing courses outside of GEC to count
- Concerned about option to require all new GEC courses to contain 1 insight area
- Flagging courses would provide incentive for faculty to include areas in courses
- Suggested that readings/workshops could be provided for faculty to help them learn more about moral reasoning
- Provide resources to team teach
- Desire to have a GEC faculty can understand
i. Flagging more courses is counter productive to this
ii. Needs to be considered with new BA and BS templates
- Question of if flagging more means that there are enough overlapping flags so that more credit hours re not required
- Courses with more than 1 flag might predominate student choice
- In some cases options at other institutions allow for one week within a major course to ethics
i. Question of if this is enough
ii. Question of how we would know if this is sufficient
- Embedding in the major – question of if this could be required
- Third writing requirement might be a model for Moral Reasoning
- AP Credit – Jay Hobgood
- Martha Garland requested a review
- Data continues to be collected
- Last year approximately 2500 students brought in 8000 credits
- Honors committee is also looking at AP Credit
- Discussion taking place among CIC schools – give credit or placement?
- ASC Senate keeps asking about AP credit during discussions of other issues
- Question of whether students should be prevented from using credit to eliminate having to take any courses in a GEC category
- Proposal: that students take at least one course in each Breadth Category to ensure integrity of Liberal Arts degree – AP credits may still count toward graduation
i. Would encourage students to take courses above 100 level
ii. Question of why transfer credits wouldn’t also be limited - Ohio Board of Regents wants students to be able to transfer easily
iii. Question of why Math is not included - Can be added if committee decides to
iv. Level of AP Credit would be left to disciplines to decide
v. Question of adding Historical Study to proposal – History Undergraduate committee is reviewing options
vi. Question of whether there is a distinction between AP course and the University equivalent course – Chemistry asks students to take another sequence with a lab to ensure that they get the university lab experience, worries that lab experience in high school AP courses are not at same level of experience
vii. Student perspective – proposal is a good idea overall
viii. If extended to Skills category it’s a huge change for BA Math requirements - Increases requirements for students who come in with credit for Math 152
ix. Recommended that University be talking to High Schools – linkage is already there
x. MAPS is revisiting details related to BA math requirement
xi. Question of whether this is mostly an Honors issue – sense is that many non-Honors students are also affected
xii. Credit may not be a huge problem now, but it will likely become one, therefore a policy should be created before it becomes a large issue that is more difficult to control
xiii. Each subject area in PK-12 has redefined expectations in past five years, recommended that members review them for their discipline
xiv. Send any feedback about proposal to Jay
- Societal Perspectives in Science and Technology Minor proposal – Linda Schoen
- Considered by Subcommittee A in 2005
- Minor geared toward science students
- Engineering requested title change
- Goal: provide students with an understanding of the interaction between science and technology
- Minor is broad so that it can serve different purposes based on individual student needs
- One concern is that student can earn the minor without taking one course in “technology” – there is a intellectual area termed “science and technology in society”, the word “technology” shouldn’t be singled out this case
- Recommendation was made that students be required to get a sign-off from an advisor to make sure students are making intentional choices
- List of History courses included in proposal need to be updated; several are not currently offered, and there is a suggestion for additions—list will be updated upon advice of History Department
Vote: 11 yes, 0 no, 0 abstention
- Task Force on the Bachelor of Science Degree – Dave Andereck
- Gathered information from CIC institutions and OSU B.S. departments
- Produced possible template based on current requirements and made changes similar to BA template
- Students able to complete requirements in under 181 hours minus the 15 free electives
- Template to be sent to B.S. granting departments to ask for feedback for how it will fit their programs, along with specific questions addressing concerns of the task force members
- Math requirement – students would be allowed to count Math 153 or above in Breadth area
- Entrepreneurship Minor – Steve Mangum, Senior Associate Dean, Fisher College
- Effort of Fisher College of Business to increase interdisciplinary programs
- Students must take electives outside their own college
- Sub A approved proposal quickly
- Business minor verses Entrepreneurship
i. Business covers the functional area of businesses
ii. Entrepreneurship is the process of creating a business, not running it
- administrators would like to see the course list grow, send any recommendations
Vote: 12 yes, 0 no, 0 abstention
- Technological Literacy will be discussed at January 12 CCI meeting Winter quarter