Colleges of the Arts and Sciences (ASC) Committee on Curriculum and Instruction (CCI)
Sub-Committee E
MINUTES from
January 03, 2008
2:00-3:20 p.m.
Present: David Andereck, Associate Dean, MPS
Alexis Collier, Psychology, CCI Sub-Committee E Chair, ASC
Steve Fink, English, HUM
Kate Hallihan, Director, Curriculum and Assessment, ASC
Keith Irvin, Animal Science, FAES
Jessica Mercerhill, Director, Special Interdisciplinary Programs, ASC
Mark Shanda, Theatre, ART
Mike Trudeau, Speech and Hearing, SBS
Mary Ellen Jenkins, Assistant Dean, Advising, ASC
AGENDA
I. Announcements
II. Updates
A) University-Level Advisory Committee for the General Education Curriculum
will be formed soon and plans to meet by the end of WI08.
B) GEC Guideline Revisions: An Ad-hoc subcommittee of the CCI is meeting regularly and working to pull together the existing guidelines and sub-guidelines in a more consistent format since they are currently an amalgamation of prior guidelines, sub guidelines, and additions dating back to the Model Curriculum
C) ASC Assessment Web-site: Updates and overhaul is currently underway to reflect a shift in audience from reaccreditation efforts to
D) GEC Course Set 4 Review: We are currently beginning the Course Set 4 (i.e. year 4) Review of large GEC courses. At our first meeting, held on Nov 30, 2007, those involved in teaching the courses under review, along with representatives from FTAD and the ASC Curriculum and Assessment Office, had the opportunity to ask questions, exchange ideas and voice opinions concerning the process.
· Alexis Collier remarked that there was more buy-in than in the past for these GEC Course Set Review efforts, as well as more up-front resistance, which led to a very productive discussion on assessment in general and in the GEC course review process and the culture shift involved.
· Faculty expressed need for more time to plan and collect data, which Alexis explained was acceptable and reasonable as long as there were concrete plans and commitments for progress in place.
· As support for this group, the ASC Curriculum and Assessment and FTAD are collaborating to provide a multi-pronged approach for support, communication, and education of those involved, including the development of the web page, a listserv, and several workshops/clinics/and one-on-one consultation opportunities which draws on the expertise of various individuals as appropriate.
· In order to provide oversight mechanisms for this process, letters to department chairs are being sent out currently, informing them of project and encouraging them to delegate if appropriate. These letters and the information contained therein will be copied to the appropriate college deans, curricular associate deans, departmental undergraduate studies chairs (or equivalents), the faculty who were at the 11-30 meeting, and ASC administrators.
III. GEC Category review
A) Natural Science Focus Group Report
· The focus group took a lot of time and planning (develop group, questions, logistics) but seemed a worthwhile effort that yielded useful information.
· Alexis Collier provided a verbal summary of the methods and structure of focus group (see handout draft of Focus Group summary) as well as of the process of note-taking, follow-up meetings with Judy, Alexis and Kate, and creation of summary document
· Steve Fink as observer at the focus group commented on the summary: Overall he agrees with summary – some points of note:
§ Steve noted a discrepancy between the reasons why students take GEC courses vs. courses that fit other programmatic requirements (major, pre-med) and the disconnect between rationale for offering courses as GEC
§ He also noted the amount of discussion on students’ lack of motivation
· There was discussion of the focus group participants’ idea to issue regular reminders to all GEC instructors that they are teaching a GEC course and what that should mean – most Sub-E members agreed that such a reminder should come ideally from the UG studies chair
· Summary of findings: faculty were supportive of the goals and objectives of the curriculum for Nat Sci as it stands, believe they are covering those goals, are not involved in outcomes assessment, are concerned with student motivation, there is great variability among sequences. This variability became apparent especially between sequences that bridge departments and campuses. The focus group realized that this was an issue which warranted much more attention.
· The committee discussed whether or not sequences do/should reflect cumulative knowledge, represent pedagogical scaffolding, and how one can/should judge what a sequence should look like (as opposed to a pre-requisite or cluster structure), and how to facilitate support and follow-up with high instructor turnover
· There was a suggestion for the CCI to set up more specific guidelines for what a sequence should represent as well as a suggestion to think about what exactly, within the context of a sequence, needs to be assessed.
· The main problem articulated at the focus group was that they had not thought about it. There is a need is for data that will show whether or not it is an actual problem. But how directive can/should one be? There was a suggestion to inform and then ask departments to ensure that they are complying with a set definition, but in order to do so, one needs a definition or guidelines.
· Defining what a sequence is too narrowly also has budget implications
· Recommendations: Do we want to do more focus groups for category reviews? Have we found anything that requires continued focus groups? Or are the general trends positive? Do we need to facilitate more for another Natural Sciences group or just check back in a year?
· What can Sub E do? Focus on sequencing in a variety of formats. Focus group method – move on or develop a new type of assessment. Tell UG director that you or someone more appropriate should attend focus group.
IV. Other
A) Regional Campus Assessment Update: Randy Smith, Alexis Collier, and Ed Adelson are currently conducting visits to regional campuses. So far they have met with representatives at the