Committee on Curriculum and Instruction
Meeting Minutes – January 11, 2008
APPROVED Minutes
Present: Adelson, Shanda, Krissek, Trudeau, Breitenberger, Harder, Hobgood, Mumy, Berman, Highley, Andereck, Mockabee, Avorbegdor, Ward, Dutta,
Guest: Anthony Mughan
1. Minutes from 11-09 and 11-30-07 unanimously approved
2. Discussion topics from Chair
A. College Curriculum Committee Major Assessment Discussions ongoing, list of dates and procedures are in pink handout.
B. List of Upper Division GEC and honors recommended Upper Level course substitutes distributed. List is incomplete. Kate will work with A-Deans and ASCTech to compile a complete and correct list which includes an official definition “Upper Division” and clarification on the second list of “Recommended Upper Level” courses which Honors Program supplied.
C. Faculty Chair of CCI discussion
i. Eligibility: similar to faculty council, any serving member who will be on CCI the next year should be eligible, one year of experience required
ii. Term: One year term with the possibility of renewal for a second term based on internal CCI election. Self-nominations welcome.
iii. Timeline for Action: Ed Adelson would like to bring a proposal to faculty senate vote on Wednesday Jan 16, 2008
iv. Compensation Discussion: Suggestions included course reduction, relief from departmental service responsibilities and/or monetary compensation from ASC. It was posited that this may need to remain a departmental decision.
v. Duties: Work with ASC Executive Associate Dean and ASC Curriculum and Assessment Office to create agendas, interface with Senate, officiate at meetings
vi. How would a faculty chair enhance current processes? Faculty would have formal oversight over CCI rather than an administrator.
3. Transfer Module update postponed until after next A-Deans meeting on Monday Jan. 14, 2008.
4. Globalization Studies Major Unanimously approved
A. Background and Context: (Tony Mughan) International Studies (IS) already has a specialization in Globalization Studies (GS) . Characteristics of this specialization have been retained as guidelines for the major proposal, but major proposal has been organized in clusters with unique perspective of providing a conceptual framework for Globalization. International Studies. With currently over 1000 majors, IS is a good home for this new major. Existing majors from other IS programs may shift into this new major.
B. Defining characteristics: GS would not be a track in IS major. This ensures that the GS major would be truly interdisciplinary and as such students must do equal concentrations in several appropriate disciplines outside of (but not excluding) social science. Also, an additional 10 hours of foreign language beyond the standard university requirement would be required, in addition to courses which reflect globalization from a cultural, artistic, and literary perspective.
C. Between the intro of the minor and the development of the major proposal many new courses have been developed that can reasonably be included in Globalization Studies.
D. Recognition of Daniel Avorbegdor of Music, Nina Berman of Comparative Studies, John Brooke of History and Jennifer Mitzen in Political Science, who have put much work into this proposal (by T. Mughan).
Recognition of John Brooke of History and Jennifer Mitzen in Political Science, who have put much work into this proposal.
E. Q: Employability support? There is a large internship program in IS and students are encouraged to complete internships. This is an advising issue and students can be guided based on interest. IS is ready to help students in this major to assist with career prep: IS has two full time advisors and a third will be hired soon to accommodate student needs.
F. Q: As this major grows, where might some opportunity/interest in curricular development: A: Comp Stds, Music, Humanities, Pop Culture Studies areas; many courses already out there will be able to count toward the major; the creation of the major will encourage further development of courses for Globalization Studies
G. Q: How does this proposal compare with other universities? A: There is nothing comparable to this GS due to its theoretical conceptualization (as opposed to an enhanced Area Studies approach). There is an honors program at UCLA with a small number of students, with a tightly sequenced set of courses, and this is a possible direction for the major as it develops.
H. Electives comprise 50% of requirements. How was this determined? Suggestions were solicited from departments by the developers.
I. Q: Page 3 number 8.– suggestion to delete “expertise” wording section and replace with “concentration” or something comparable
J. Q: Page 4 – integration across fields and courses will be encouraged: how will you ensure and monitor such integration? Capstone implies focus, rather than breadth. How will you ensure breadth and integration among such different courses and faculty? Intro courses address breadth, students should be making connections. Q: Will faculty teaching these courses ever get together to discuss this integration? Structure of interdisciplinarity and key courses from interdisciplinary units will implicitly provide the sense of breadth and integration. This is a challenge at this level and at all levels, even departments and programs like this are more conscientious of providing a structured integrated focus and it will be the job of the oversight committee to monitor this.
K. Consider the proposal for the faculty advisory committee (p. 1 “General Information”) Q: Is this a sufficient organizational structure for this advisory body? Success of program depends to some extent on how much faculty are engaged and dedicated to integration.
L. P 13-14: Are there supposed to be themes? The courses contained in the sample programs do not appear to present a readily coherent from a student perspective. Advisors would be responsible for driving various approaches and focuses for students. Some will emphasize different issues based on interest (economic, violence, etc.) Q: Is there a theme for structuring a sample program? Then again the lack of easy coherence brings to light the presence of conflict, contradiction, and tension inherent in Globalization Studies and globalization in general. Advising role is crucial and advisors are professionals, not faculty, enhancing the big-picture knowledge.
M. Q: Are you hoping/expecting to attract honors students to this major? Have not really thought about much at this point, but is a logical next step in the development of the program.
N. Q: If 357 is a core course that will introduce students to major, why require sophomore standing? Because it is a 300-level course. Perhaps make it 200—level? Prefer to keep sophomore standing OR permission of instructor. Advising does not see this as an impediment to students taking the course. Ideal scenario is 356 in AU second year and 357 in WI of second year. Make all effective dates current.
i. If this is the intro course to the major, could we put something formal about the Globalization Studies major into the syllabus for the purposes of transparency for students? Syllabus: include general course information (credit hours, meeting info) Suggestion for a grading schema. As an IS proposal, it is the CCI’s purview to discuss such issues as syllabus.
O: Suggestion for a Colloquium requirement for students, one quarter per year, meets once per week where different instructors would come together to discuss various topics with the students to see how particular issues of globalization is applied across different disciplines. Academically a very good idea, time and money will provide constraints, but proposers not averse to idea. One danger is that such a structure could add to or further split synthesis? Might it not be better to expect such issues to be embedded in core courses and in the purview of the advisors? There are limits between interdisciplinarity and coherence.
P. Comment: inspiring and timely major proposal. Within past 4 years since original proposal, for example, are there more performative arts courses that would apply. Q: How can new courses be added to this major? Depts. contact the faculty advisory committee for major and courses from the Circulating Form are invited into the major if appropriate. Also faculty advisory committee can bring such additions and changes to CCI.
Q. Assessment: The role of advisor is very important in structuring these programs is in tension with scheduling constraints. Is there a mechanism within assessment process to monitor that students are getting a coherent program? Suggestions: Exit surveys, periodic review of graduates’ transcripts by faculty advisory committee, curricular mapping by the student, and in the capstone course embed questions for students to provide information on issues of coherency. This is an ongoing issue within international studies and according to October 2007 external review data, students indicated that the coherency was not a problem (Mughan).
R. Page 6: Relationship between majors in IS or GS? Students will not be able to double major between IS and GS because IS is the administrative shell, but students could double major GS and other IS majors. Chances are that if they did so, they would automatically have a minor in a language, providing they did the coursework all in one language, which could be an added enhancement for students.
S. Q: How will students who are interested in the GS major know the optimum prep courses to take in their first year? It will be important to work with ASC advising to help steer first year students into the program. Even though 357 is a sophomore level course, students can take a variety of applicable courses in their first year, including 356.
Recommendations for contingencies: Separate academic misconduct and disability statements, minor additions to syllabus, minor changes to proposal, inclusion of above ideas in assessment plan, change pre-reqs for 597 to include 357.
Motion to approve: Shanda 2nd Harder Unanimously approved, 2 abstentions.
5. Cultural and Critical Theory Minor Proposal
A. Context and Background: Deb Lowry
Had initially been considered as a possible honors minor. Ideas for proposal began several years ago. Sally Kitch (WS) no longer here. There have been many developments in this area in past 25 years within arts, hums, social sciences and the underpinnings of the way such disciplines produce their scholarship. As a result of the development of the consciousness and scholarship in this field, Sally Kitch, Jim Phelan, and Steve Melville developed this proposal. There are courses in critical theory in various departments and the idea behind this proposal is to pull these approaches together in a structural and more transparent and cohesive manner to help undergraduates see the underpinnings of critical theory.
i. There was some discussion of developing a core for SBS students. International Studies and Geography were consulted and at that time declined involvement but this can be added later if wished.
ii. Q: Why would there need to be a specific SBS core? Is such a distinction necessary? If it is just HUM then that needs to be clarified, if not, other units need to be drawn in a more obvious way.
B. Typical minor structure with core courses, a new ASC course proposal (ASC 331) plus additional 20 credits required from 3 separate areas of study so students can have breadth as well as disciplinary depth and focus, as evidenced by Categories1-3 sample plans. Such structure will benefit students’ research skills and enhance their undergraduate academic and intellectual experience in terms of cultural theory and critical analysis.
C. Sub-A expressed some concerns which Jim Phelan has addressed: Definitions of cultural studies and critical theory and the canon of works to which they refer. Also addressed was the question of why this needs to be a separate structure and the impact of undergrad research. Optional capstone course which allows students the opportunity to reflect on the theoretical underpinnings of their own educational experience.
D. Q: List of faculty on p. 12 does not include Psychology (No psych courses are offered) or Philosophy (despite many course offerings in this area.) How were these courses chosen/not chosen? Departments were solicited directly and if they are not there, it is likely they opted out of having their courses included. Any listed courses were listed with permission of department. Clarify the faculty list: Why are people not/listed? How was it developed? Need a clarification on the methodological development of this list. But proposers did do what was asked – Philosophy gave concurrence. CCI needs to be mindful of limits to inclusion and CCI expectations of participation in interdisciplinary programs.
E. Q: Page 5 – Can all courses for GEC and Minor be double-counted? Theoretically, yes.
F. Page 6 : Create an ASC Minor Page
G. P. 8 – Students “should” declare minor? Can it be retroactive? Yes – same for all minors on campus? Please clarify language. And if students MUST declare, then it should be in 331 syllabus. 331 not a pre-req, but rather a req for completing the minor. Please match wording with intentions.
H. Northwestern example missing from Appendix C. Please make sure this is in final proposal.
Vote Postponed until next meeting pending further information from Jim Phelan
6. ASC 883 postponed due to time constraints.
| Documents | |
|---|---|
| CCI Minutes 11-30-07.doc | 01/08/2008 02:37:10 PM |
| CCI Minutes 11-09-07.doc | 01/08/2008 02:31:00 PM |
| Cultural and Critical Theory Minor Proposal (CCI).doc | 01/02/2008 04:06:28 PM |
| ENG-ASC 883 Proposal.doc | 12/28/2007 03:32:05 PM |
| Globalization Major Proposal.doc | 12/28/2007 03:14:08 PM |
| GlobalizationAppendixC-Concurrences.pdf | 12/28/2007 01:09:02 PM |