ASCnet

Details

Date

2008-05-13

Time

Location

Agenda

1:30-3:30pm; Smith Lab 4187

Agenda:
Discussion of staffing of seminars

• 2:00 guest: Rick Livingston

Proposal to limit faculty to teaching 1 seminar per quarter
Seminar Proposals:

• Soland
• Galron

Seminar Revisions:

• Adeeko
• Rotter

Discussion of Clusters formatting

Notes

Freshman Seminar Proposals:

1. Adeeko – approved
1. Suggested that 2 page reports and text pages for reading assignments be included in weekly schedule on syllabus.
2. Rotter – approved
3. Soland – approved with contingency
1. Add a grading scale to your syllabus
2. Provide more detail about the take-home assignments. Will there be an opportunity to discuss them in class?
3. Approximately how many pages of reading will be required each week?
4. Discussion with Rick Livingston regarding non-tenure track faculty as instructors
1. Committee affirms the rule that FS be taught by tenure-track faculty
5. Galron – sent back
1. Recommended that films be shown in 1/2s to allow for discussion during each class period
2. Edits needed to course description (see last sentence in particular)
3. Is the take-home assignment the 4 response papers? This needs to be clearer.
4. Suggested that the question of strengths and weaknesses of the film be deleted for the response papers and that the papers focus on the cultural aspects the rest of the questions address.
5. Suggested that week 10 be a course synthesis day instead of a movie to allow for closure.
6. Can a bit of research be integrated into the course? Suggested that students might research the history of to provide a context, or modern as a contrast to the movies made 30 years ago.
7. Suggested that a topic for each movie be provided for students to focus on while watching so that the response papers are more focused.
6. Jeffries – approved with contingency
1. Strike line 2 of course description – the committee felt this was more of a distraction than a needed statement.
2. Concern that one 4-page paper is 50% of the grade. Can this be divided into 2 assignments so that students can make improvements throughout the quarter?
3. Is this course being held once a week? Can a student really miss 4 classes (1/3 of the quarter) before failing? Consider only allowing 2 absences, unless you will be meeting twice a week.
7. Weide – approved

Clusters

1. Committee updated on concerns of current status of program
1. The current budget model requires that seats be open to all students, severely limiting the interdisciplinarity by limiting the references that may be made to previous courses in clusters without having to retrace content for those that are outside of the cluster.
2. Faculty who are thinking about proposing a cluster have expressed concern that the amount of work to develop and teach their courses will not be reflected in what students experience, and therefore are reluctant to devote the time.
3. Each Cluster team is alerted to deadlines for having a new GEC course approved in time for student registration, but few faculty seem to truly understand the process and getting them to propose their courses on time has been a struggle. The resulting effect is that the launch date for proposed clusters keeps being delayed, or worse, clusters that begin with a current course start to run without have a second course in place for the following quarter. Both of these situations cause confusion to students and academic advisors.
4. Academic Advisors, while supportive of the concept of Clusters, have expressed some concern regarding the additional complexity Clusters add to scheduling. While it is helpful to be able to point students to specific courses based on their interests, the restrictions of when those courses are offered on top of trying to schedule major classes might prove to be another impediment.