ASCnet

Details

Date

2007-11-15

Time

Location

Agenda

3-5PM Smith Lab 4187

1. Music 251
2. Music 668
3. Art Ed 889
4. Dance 859
5. Music 645D
6. Theatre 534
7. Music 240, 241, 242, 243
8. Tentative: HA 815

Notes

 

COTA CC

Unapproved Minutes

11/1/07

4187 Smith Labatory

 

 

Present: Fox, Simcox, Haase, Cruttenden, Tupman, Ward, Mudrak, Proctor; Mockabee, Hallihan; Invited Guests: Lora Dobos, Music and Lisa Florman, History of Art

 

Agenda:

 

 

I. Approval of 10-4 minutes (added Val Mockabee to attendance list)

 

Motion to approve: Ward, 2^nd: Haase

All in favor, none opposed

 

 

II. Music BA Revision Proposal  Unanimously approved

 

 

Presentation by Lora Dobos

A. Description of changes – addition of 3 quarters of private study is major  change.  Auditions were always required but no private study.  NASM mandates          private study.  In addition, the upper division electives are changed.  One upper level theory class and one upper level musicology class have been eliminated. These classes have been replaced with electives at the 300 level or above.

B. Q: Students climbed in 2005 but not significantly.  A: These changes make program more attractive to potential majors.  Less theory, including some performance in the degree and the potential to take classes in the music media and enterprise program  (whose classes may fit into this) to make it more interesting, or if one really wanted to focus on ethno-musicology or performance or music ed, these are now available in upper level electives. Double majors now easier.

C. This uses pre-existing courses and won’t require the development of new  courses

D. The current BA requires a much more rigorous GEC requirement than the tagged degrees in music. This will not change.

E. Program can sustain an increase in numbers

F. Revision affords a quality control factor that did not exist before, increasing the integrity of program through auditions/testing throughout the program’s length in        addition to the auditioning to get into program

G. Verification totals of credit hours on new tables. Existing must total 70, proposed 73, put in boxes

H. Q: Possible that student could have on transcript a music BA with no courses that go beyond 400?  Yes, but music theory 200s are regularly counted as 400-500 level courses due to difficulty so there are more ‘upper division’ courses than it first appears to have and advisors regularly deal with this issue.

           

III. BM/BME Discussion, Presentation by Lora Dobos  Unanimously approved

 

 

 

            A. Context: NASM self study and student organization feedback drove changes.    Sophomore year too overwhelming, comparison of undergrad programs at    benchmark institutions. Revisions focus on core theory program.  OSU music students are  in class much more than credit reflected, esp. as compared to peer institutions. 

            B. Goal: to streamline program, delivering similar content in a more efficient   way.  P 3 shows changes:

1. Elimination of music technology degree; Aural training – students need two full years of aural training so this was increased, although time in class is less.       Faculty delivery of instruction has been improved based on active learning techniques.                                            

2. Music History: took out Intro Listening to Music course (1 cr; s/u) which was not meeting learning goals.  Change: deliver music history in 4 quarters (instead of 3) with less class time per course.

3. Decreased Ethnomusicology reqs in some programs, which was far above the required hours at peer institutions. 

4. Music Theory: took out some material in required 6-qtr sequence and put it up into 600-level and folded content of Form and Analysis course into music theory course sequence

            C. Appendix C outlines how all other programs (12) adopted new core curriculum        into their programs and in what capacity based on NASM recommendations

            D. One sample 4-year plan provided in document. Majors range from 186 to over 200 hours.  All major programs are down at least 5 hours

            E. p.19 question on new core, old GEC – because of request (Ed Adelson) to   separate out new GEC, which will soon result in new core, new GEC.  Rationale:   college has to come forth together with GEC proposal once this one passes. Make   footnote in proposal to address this issue.

            F. Changes to the major are minimal.

            G. Appendix D: all are course proposals or changes that are "in the pipeline"

            H. P 31 total minimum hrs required should say: “reduced by 5 hours” (not 10)

 

 

 

Motion to approve BA and BM/BME proposals: Proctor      2^nd: Mudrak

Unanimously approved

(Val Mockabee to write cover letter, Lora to make a few corrections)

 

 

 

IV. Course Change to Music 201  Unanimously approved

            A. Change pre-req to not specifically exclude music BA students

Motion Ward, 2^nd Haase

 

 

 

V. Music 244 Musical Traditions, applying for GEC status  SENT BACK

 

 

            A. Needs to address 5 questions from Model Curriculum (p. 14-15)

            B. Needs more robust assessment plan (see college template)

            C. Credit level –Need   to strike the 3 credit-hour option, resubmit with a new course number only as a 5-credit course (GEC considerations)

D. Suggestion to rename 344 rather than decimalizing. Or even 444 as an upper-division VPA GEC course?

 

 

 

 

 

 

VI. Music 674 SENT BACK

 

 

            A. Include Participation quote

            B. Guidelines for oral presentation and research paper

C. Description line: “landmark opera”? “Study of Russian opera in relation to concurrent literary…” i.e. strike years, leave the rest the same

            D. P. 4 syllabus typo 1971?

            E. Include a clear schedule for reading assignments (i.e. page numbers, chapters)

           

VII. History of Art 201 & 202 application for GEC  Approved with Contingencies

As Historical Studies, Category A.

Presenter:  Lisa Florman, Assoc. Chair HoA

            A. Low-level introductions to discipline

            B. Would like them to be considered first for Cat. A. and if not, for Category B.

            C.  Syllabi have been adjusted to include GEC category objectives

            D. Disability font 14 or 16?  Lisa will check and make 16

            E.  Alter wording for last sentence on question 2, p.3

            F. Rephrase Q 4 (p. 3-4) more positively, don’t weaken argument

            G.  Committee feels that seeking a concurrence from History is neither beneficial            nor expected.

            H. Needs participation paragraph – already has expanded statement (2             paragraphs)

            I.  Suggestion: Grading criteria?  General scoring rubric/guidelines for     assignments/ breakdown of how a paper is scored (20% grammar, 60%     content…) “Paper will address student Historical Study outcomes”

           

Motion: Approve with Contingencies (D., E., F., H., I.)

Motion:  Proctor, 2^nd Ward

Unanimously Approved

 

 

 

VII. Dance 859 Readings  SENT BACK

            A. Include syllabus

            B. Concern over amount of readings and viewings implied by proposal

            C. Would like a topical outline (week by week)

            D. More specificity in course description

           

VIII. Concurrence Issues

            A. Changes would remove veto power, thus removing strangle-holds on courses            moving forward.  Art Ed 255, Eng 269

            B. Take back to units and ask chairs and directors to get general opinion

 

 

 

IX. Transfer Student Criteria for Admissions (CESP) Discussion

            A. 2.0 to 2.5

            B. Would eliminate a disproportionate number of African-American, int’l. sts.    How many Arts students?

            C. GPA as an accurate indicator is questionable

            D. Maturity issues as well – transfer sts have a maturity that is usually better than            incoming freshman

            E. Request for transfer student retention to graduation

Meeting adjourned 5:09