Subcommittee on Core Curriuclum Minutes 2013-09-04

Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by Amy Sumpter at 1:00 p.m. in Arts & Sciences Room 2-51.

Attendance

Voting Members Present: Mary Magoulick, Cara Meade, Chavonda Mills, Amy Sumpter
Non-Voting Member Present: Kay Anderson
Guests: Roberta Gorham, Yeprem Mehranian, Shaundra Walker
Regrets: Scott Butler, John Swinton

Approval of Minutes

The minutes from the August 21 and August 28 meetings were approved.

Announcement

GC2Y 2000 Political Themes in Muslim Novels, which was previously circulated to the committee, has been withdrawn.

Action Items

RELI 3500 Buddhist Traditions in Asia, RELI 3510 South Asian Buddhism, RELI 3520 Tibetan Buddhism, RELI 3530 Zen Buddhism, and RELI 3600 Hindu Religious Traditions for the Global Overlay
After discussion, the committee approved these courses as a slate with a vote of 4-0-0. The guests in attendance, who are waiting final confirmation to SoCC by the University Senate, also endorsed this proposal. These courses will now be forwarded to CAPC and University Senate as information items and to the Provost for approval. These courses will not need system approval for inclusion in the global overlay.

GEOG 2100 Introduction to Geospatial Science as an Area D Course for Non-Science Majors
At the request of the vice-chair, this course will be the first item on the agenda at the committee’s next meeting.

Discussion Items

Global Overlay Submission Process. The committee reviewed a revised draft of a new global overlay submission form that Mary prepared. The committee agreed that the new form was ready to test. A copy will be forwarded to Lee Gillis, who agreed to pilot the new format with his department’s PSYC 3500 course.

Committee Membership. The University Senate bylaws define SoCC’s current membership as follows:

University Senate Bylaws, V.Section2.D.1.a. Membership. The Subcommittee on the Core Curriculum shall have ten (10) members distributed as follows: the University Registrar, who shall be an ex officio non-voting member, eight (8) selected from the Corps of Instruction faculty, at least three (3) of whom are elected faculty senators, and one (1) member who is the Chief Academic Officer or an individual appointed by the Chief Academic Officer to serve as his/her designee. For each college not represented from among the aforementioned three (3) elected faculty senators serving on the committee, the outgoing Subcommittee on Nominations shall nominate a Corps of Instruction faculty member from that college to serve on this committee.

The committee began a discussion about SoCC’s membership and size. The following questions were raised and discussed:
• Should each area of the core be represented on the committee by a faculty member who actively teaches in that area? Mary noted that there was a verbal agreement from the beginning of the new core that the core review committee would have someone from each area of the core on it. Committee members discussed the possibility of having one member from each area of the core. Another possibility would be to invite faculty from each area to participate on the committee as guests; however, faculty might not be eager to participate in that manner since they would not be able to vote and might not receive service credit for their participation.
• Should colleges and departments that do not offer courses in the core have representation on the committee? Some members noted that they felt that each college, and possibly the library, should have a representative on the committee. They argued that all colleges have a vested interest in and are affected by the core. Faculty members from the Colleges of Education and Health Sciences now teach in Area B, and faculty members from the College of Business teach in Areas B, D, and E. All of the colleges also reply on the core to prepare their students for upper-level coursework.
• Should a specific percentage of the committee be comprised of faculty from Arts & Sciences? Some members expressed a desire that at least 50% of the committee membership be comprised of faculty from Arts & Sciences because they staff the majority of core courses and are most affected by changes in the core. Others argued that this would most likely occur naturally if faculty representatives were selected from each area of the core, since most core faculty are in the College of Arts & Sciences.
• Are there any other areas or points of view that should be included on the committee, such as a member of the University Assessment Team? A representative from the University Assessment Team might also be critical as SoCC continues to address its assessment responsibilities. The library was also mentioned as an area that should be considered.
• Does the chair of SoCC have to be an elected member of University Senate? This question was raised but not discussed.
• What is the appropriate committee size? How large is too large? Adding additional representatives from these areas could result in a committee with 14 or more members.

The committee discussed the possibly of recommending a change to the bylaws, which would be sent from SoCC through CAPC to University Senate. Mary and Cara agreed to draft a proposal, which would include a representative from each area of the core, a representative from each college, a member of the University Assessment Team, the Provost’s appointee, and the Registrar. This draft will be circulated among the committee via email and discussed at the next meeting.

Next Meeting

The committee’s next meeting will be Wednesday, September 11, at 1:00 p.m. in Arts & Sciences Room 2-51.

Adjournment

The committee adjourned at 2:05 p.m.