ASCnet

Details

Date

2007-10-24

Time

Location

Agenda

4-5:30PM University Hall 156

Agenda: 

1. Approval of 10-10-07 minutes

2. Anthro 315  

3. Geography 643

4. Geography 410

5. Political Sci 793.05

6. Electronic Course Approval System discussion (Gene Mumy)

7. Preliminary Discussion of Revisions to Poli Sci Major (packet does not include Critical Theory new course requests)

8. Sample program concurrence form (Gene)

Notes

10/26/2007    

4-5:40PM, Univ Hall 156

APPROVED

 

Present: Bellair, David, Thompson, Maleski, Liddle, McGraw, King, Weinberg, Mumy, Haddad, Hobgood, Klosterman-Lando, Lee, McClish, Vasey

 

1. 10-10-2007 minutes approved.

 

2.  Anthro 315- Approved with contingency (on changes)

i. rationale of the course proposal- new interdisciplinary course

            ii. concurrences are complete – Curriculum Office will check and confirm.

            iii. Suggestion: pre-reg—add Bio 101 or equivalent foundational courses

            iv. fix typo of the title on syllabus- “Contemporary”

            v. needs official disability statement

 

            Motion to approve with contingency: David                   Yes: All.           No: none.

 

3. Geo 643- Approved

            i. intro and rationale of the course change—course content change with time

ii. concurrence issue—support letters from comp studies and poli sci

            iii. concerns: (1) why remove GEC 6B category from the course? (2) grad students data collection use for dissertation- instructor gives caution to students (Jay Hobgood will inform the instructor.)

           

            Motion to approve: David         Yes: all.            No: none.

 

4. Geo 410- Approved with contingency (on changes)

i. intro of the course

ii. fill out the subject code on the request form

iii. course GEC categories:

a.       Natural science category- ok

b.      How does it meet the Diversity category? A: The course discusses global regions, international issues, different countries and cultures.

c.       Social science category seems weak— How does the course meet the objectives of GEC Social Science category? Which topics? Where on the syllabus? What reading?

 

d.      Not enough assignments for social science category.

e.       Suggest to reconsider if the course meets all GEC categories requested for the course. If so, (1) the syllabus/curriculum should reflect the categories’ content (2) revise the GEC rationale in clear and good language (3) could add bullets of GEC category objectives if apply

 

iv. GEC course standards:

a.       Discussion: should SBS CC evaluate the proposal with GEC concerns? -- Appropriate to make the proposals sound after SBS review.

b.      Needs instructor’s contact info and grading scale.

 

v. revision will be distributed electronically to the committee by Chair and reviewed before going to the next approval stage.

vi.Needs a grading breakdown (will also help figure out how it differs from honors)

vii. Q:   How does it differ from H410?  A little less reading; functionally: fewer debates less leading of discussion sections – faculty will teach each section, not students  H410 satisfies GECs similarly.  Include copy of Honors Syllabus in new proposal

 

Motion to approve with contingency: David & Hobgood.  Yes: all.    No: none.

 

5. Poli Sci 793 – Approved.

            i. intro of the request— adding one course to the majors.

            ii. Q & A:

a.       Syllabus? No standard syllabus, for it varies with instructors and majors.

b.      Course for grad students: How many hours can students take, maximum 50? Usually no more than 3 courses—department’s concern and advice. 15-20 credit hours should be reasonable. Similar to 999? No.

 

            Motion to approve: David         Yes: all.            No: none.

 

6. Program concurrence form discussion: should “non-support” be removed from the form?

i. pros- softer form which minimizes turf issues is favorable, also can encourage interdisciplinary courses.

ii. cons- if “non-support”, then comments can be added. Clear language is needed if “not support”. Examples of non-concurrence cases.

iii. concerns: do professional colleges need concurrence? Yes- circulating form from Randy Smith.

iv. for the cmte to think about and give input

 

7. new Electronic system

            i. intro of the system

            ii. concern for university-wide automatic electronic notifications for all proposals—concurrence issues will be exacerbated

 

Motion to Oppose ECAS automatic electronic notifications: Mumy. Yes: all. No: none.

 

8. Political Science preliminary discussion

            i. intro of the proposal

            ii. independent initiatives from faculty members, hope to have independent results for the major and the courses

            iii. will resume discussion in the future

 

 

 

            Motion to send back

            Vote All in favor