CAPC Minutes 12/02/11


Cara Meade

Recorder Email: 
Meeting Date: 
Friday, December 2, 2011
Date of Next Meeting: 
Friday, January 13, 2012 - 3:30pm
Location of Next Meeting: 

A&S 216

Curriculum and Assessment Policy Committee
Minutes Text: 

Curriculum and Assessment Policy Committee (CAPC)


December 12, 2011


Present:  Susan Steele, Alex Blazer, John Swinton, Karen Bendersky, Cara Meade, Beth Broyles, Beauty Bragg, Kay Anderson


Absent: Bill Fisher


Regrets:  Carol Bader, Diane Gregg




I) Approval of Agenda: Committee unanimously approved today’s agenda


II)  Approval of Minutes:  Unanimously approved minutes from 11-4-2011


III) Unfinished business:


A.  USLG:  Ryan proposed using Roberts Rules to facilitate this discussion. Two proposals were presented. Ryan provided an overview of the forums including feedback from the events.  He presented the blog and the committee discussed information presented.  We discussed feedback from forums and overarching recurrent themes from all forums.  One major piece of recurring feedback was regarding having 4 goals instead of 5, combining one and two. After discussion, the consensus of this group was to combine two goals and ultimately have 4.


Our discussion:

Goal 1

-    Captures the essence of what we want

-    What is multiple contexts? What does that mean?

-    And/or language in the goal? Or do we want both to have to be addressed  

      and assessed.   Yes, keep the and/or language for assessment purposes


-    Goal will read:  Integrate effective speaking and/or writing skills in 

      multiple contexts.

Goal 2


Drop creative. Measuring creative thinking is very difficult. Much agreement regarding this.


Creative thinking is critical. 


Drop the list after “including”.  Would simply read “Use critical thinking skills to analyze evidence. All here in agreement.


Agree with the idea of a supporting document of


What about add ‘problem solving’ to goal 2?  Would read “Use critical thinking skills to analyze evidence and solve problems.  Problem with this is not all disciplines problem solve so is this getting too specific? 


Consensus:  yes. This is too narrow. Do not include problem solving.  This is yet another example of where the supporting document will come into great use.


Another suggestion:  Title: Critical and Analytical Thinking. Demonstrate critical thinking skills. Evaluate and apply quantitative and/or qualitative analytical methods. This is, again, becoming too narrow in scope. Again, the supporting document will solve the issue of fleshing out what is meant by the general goal, targeting specific skills.



Goal 3


Suggestion to strike ‘historic’. Also strike contemporary. Consensus: Yes, strike both of these.


Responses of peoples, cultures, societies, groups… What do the first three bring to the goal that groups doesn’t?  Suggestion: drop groups. Or it really doesn’t hurt anything so leave it. Concensus: leave it.


Do we leave diversity in the title?  Does ‘global’ assume diversity? Concensus is that yes, it does.  Leave as global understanding.


Suggestion: change “and” to “or”


Goal will read “Analyze and evaluate the diverse responses of peoples, cultures, societies or groups to global issues”.


Goal 4


Suggestion from forum:  Demonstrate an awareness of the  

       responsibilities of informed citizenship and civic engagement.


Suggestion: eliminate civic engagement. Consensus: Yes


Suggestion: add ‘in personal and professional contexts’.  Consensus: Yes.


Suggestion:  Change title to informed citizenship? Consensus: Yes.


Goal will read:  Demonstrate an awareness of the  

responsibilities of informed citizenship in personal and professional contexts.



Discussion of title:  University Shared Learning Goals or Shared Learning Goals?  Can’t make a decision regarding this. Opinions of the committee are split.  Consensus:  Let’s send it to senate as is (including Shared in the title) and see what the senate wants to do with it.  Any senator can propose a change to the title in the senate meeting.


Chair suggested bringing this to vote

Motion to approve above changes to the USLGs was made

Motion was seconded

All in favor



B. Overlays proposals: Cube revision


Brief discussion:  These aren’t as pressing as USLGs.  There seem to be very few people, if any, in favor of keeping the seven writing and speaking overlays.  Ryan presented the original proposal and an alternative proposal. Discussed feedback from forums.  Options:


Do nothing; keep the 7


Eliminate overlays altogether (eliminating 7 outcomes)


Pare 7 outcomes to 2, one speaking and one writing


We  were at the end of the meeting time so a motion was made to extend for 5 minutes.

5 minutes extension unanimous


Question: how will we not lose these skills of writing and speaking altogether if they aren’t being directly measured, for example by these overlays?

Answer – 13 hours in the B1 and B2 courses. Also this is a new USLG.


After further discussion, most agreement was to support the proposal that eliminates the speaking and writing overlays.


Suggestion was made that we vote on a proposal to send to Senate

Suggestion was made that CAPC send forth the proposal that eliminates the speaking and writing overlays to Senate

Vote was called


5 for

1 against

1 abstained


Meeting adjourned.

Action Items: 
Tentative Agenda: