CAPC Minutes 11/04/11

Curriculum and Assessment Policy Committee

11/04/11

Ryan Brown, Diane Gregg, Beth Broyles, Beauty Bragg, Karen Bendersky, John Swinton, Kay Anderson, Susan Steele, Cara Meade

Regrets: Carol Bader, Alex Blazer, Bill Fisher

Guest: Sunita Manian

I) Approval of Agenda: Unanimously approved today’s agenda

II) Approval of Minutes:  Unanimously approved minutes from 10/07/11 as submitted.

III) New Business:

A.  Proposal from Liberal Studies Program

Sunita Manian presented a proposal for the committee’s consideration regarding possibly creating concentrations in the BA degree in Liberal Studies. The degree is already in place. This proposal is to create concentrations within that program. Sunita attended to present information and answer questions regarding the proposal. 

Question- This is a Liberal Studies degree, why have concentrations?

Answer-  Students are often unsure and unfocused when they come into the program and often left unprepared right to the end. Faculty would have to work with them last minute to pull it all together. Structural problems.  Concentrations will give them a structure, they are multidisciplinary so within the nature of Liberal Studies but a concentration will provide a bit more guidance and scaffolding as the student moves through the program. In this model, they must develop ideas much earlier on and will be more focused from the beginning. They must have a prospective approved prior to being admitted to the degree program.

Discussion of concerns:

-      

Do we have departments in the areas of these concentrations? (Do we have the expertise?) This may raise a red flag.

-      

Will this really provide the focus for the ‘undecided’ type student?

-      

Are these really concentrations? Do they fit the true model of concentrations?  Is there a core of courses required for all students and then the concentration is just added on? Are there many similar requirements across all proposed concentrations?

-      

Will students really be able to complete any of these concentrations as proposed in the time allotted, given the schedule of course offerings, etc… Will the students logistically be able to complete the degree in this format?

-      

2950 and 4950 courses are problematic in that they are not officially ‘on the books’ and may never be.

-      

This seems to go against the Liberal Arts program in the first place.

-      

Are the issues that led to this proposal advising/administrative issues rather than problems of the program structure as it is currently offered?

-      

With individualized plan, should prospectus have to be accepted prior to taking coursework? What if this occurs last minute (semester they want to graduate)?

Responses:

-Started off calling these tracks rather than concentrations. They were guided away from this and it was suggested that they formulate this proposal around concentrations.

-A large array of choices is included so students can finish this degree in within the timeframe that they should.  Several people worked on this in their respective areas and made sure that there would be pathways for students to complete this as proposed. The wide range of choices of courses should ensure this, even if each course isn’t offered every semester. The chairs involved approve this move for the degree program.

-Although it is liberal studies, the students, at this stage of development, really do need more guidance than is currently provided in the Liberal Studies program. This has been demonstrated again and again and it is clear that the students need additional scaffolding. This is not a ‘backdoor’ towards any major that we don’t currently have, rather it is combining areas that rationally fit together and will deliver a cohesive program of study. This should not be seen as a narrowing of options or of the degree in general.

-This seems like this allows customization of a program for both ‘types’ of students who may potentially be LS majors. Those who are a bit unsure of the direction that they want to take with the degree and those who know exactly what they want to do. This seems to cater to both.

-Raising the GPA, having to find an advisor, and having to have a prospectus early on

Considerations:

There are clear inadequacies that will have to be addressed before this moves forward. Courses are listed in the proposal that are no longer offered. European Studies track is short 3 hours in Area F. The layout needs clarifying so it is perfectly clear to students. Inconsistencies in the proposal need to be addressed.

Recommendation:

Send the proposal back to the group for revisions given the above considerations, in particular taking a careful look at courses listed on this proposal and making sure they are indeed still being and will continue to be offered.

-Motion was made to send back for revisions with recommendations from the committee.

-Seconded

-All approved

B.  Proposal from University Assessment Team was presented to reconsider the current General Education Outcomes and Plan.

Discussion was held regarding the proposal.  There was agreement that this is an improvement over the 11 and will perhaps bring some clarity to what we mean by general education on this campus.  Questions arose regarding implementation but the plan is yet to be written (pending approval of outcomes) so some questions are not yet answered.

Question- Do all majors have to map at some point to demonstrate all 5 outcomes?

Answer- Yes

Question- How can they do this?

Answer- Electives, QEP, Experiential Transcript, Service Learning, LBTC. If we truly are liberal arts, we can’t limit just to what is happening in courses. There are more broad experiences that expose students to these goals that we wish for them to achieve.

Discussion regarding the 5 outcomes as proposed.

Some suggestions:

1. Include and/or in all of the outcomes

2. Critical and Creative Thinking- Goal #2-  doesn’t have much at all regarding creative thinking. Creative should be stricken from the title.

3. Reading should not be included in written and oral communication (goal 1)

4.  How about 4 outcomes instead of 5, combining goals 2 and 3 by moving ‘analytical’ into goal 2 and eliminating goal 3?

Suggestion that we should hold a series of forums regarding this proposal and the one that we didn’t get to today, the CUBE proposal. Ryan will look into getting these organized soon, before the end of November.

Meeting adjourned.