Meeting Date: 
March 15, 2021
03/15/2021 1:00 pm to 2:00 pm
Zoom Meeting
  1. Course Proposals
    • Discussion Needed
      • ENG 109 – Literature & the Arts
      • AEC 411/511 – Science, Technology & Society
      • PH 111 – Physical Science
      • HDFS 260 – Social Processes & Institutions
  1. Questions about Faculty Senate Presentation

Voting members present: Kathy Becker-Blease; Kelsey Emard, Daniel Faltesek, McKenzie Huber, Jack Istok, Matthew Kennedy, Lori McGraw, Rene Reitsma, David Roundy, Rorie Solberg, Kaplan Yalcin
Voting members absent: Heather Arbuckle, Aidas Banaitis, Andrew Harker
Ex-Officio guests: DPD Director – Bradley Boovy; Academic Programs & Assessment – Heath Henry; WIC Director – Sarah Tinker Perrault; Ecampus – Karen Watte


Course Proposals

  • Discussion Needed
    • ENG 109 – Literature & the Arts
      • Initially sent back to add detail about assessment of LOs and add course specific LOs and to rework statement about plagiarism – all changes have been made as requested.
      • Percentages of letter grades has no +/- for grade distribution.
      • Course description on syllabus does not match description that is in CIM.
      • Motion to approve; seconded. Motion passes with 9 in favor, none against. One abstention.
    • AEC 411/511 – Science, Technology & Society
      • Moved to next week
    • PH 111 – Physical Science
      • The course description is clear; assessment of LOs are clear.
      • Pre-requisites – MTH 111 is taken by most students, but MTH 112 may be a little more limiting. It does seem like a necessary pre-requisite for understanding the concepts taught in the course. The instructor mentioned that she has had an issue of students not having enough math understanding. Students also have the option of MTH 211/212, which opens it up a little more.
        • If students test out of 111/112, can they still take this course?
          • CLA students are not likely to be able to take this course – they only need MTH 105 for their programs. They can take these courses, but they are not required.
      • Anecdotally, students enjoy them enjoyable. Some of the assessment regarding labs is somewhat vague.
      • Motion to approve; seconded. Motion passes with 6 in favor, 1 against. Three abstentions
    • HDFS 260 – Social Processes & Institutions
      • Could be appropriate but needs more development
      • Syllabus does not talk about critical thinking.
      • LO 2 talks about a current social issue – the syllabus does not explicitly articulate what the current social issue is.
      • LO 3 also needs further development
      • How it connects to other areas of study is not mentioned in the syllabus.
      • CSLOs should be relabeled.
        • Motion to send back to address listed issues; seconded. Motion passes with 8 in favor, none against. Two abstentions.
    • OC 444 – WIC
      • Major revisions were made as requested.
        • Approved with no discussion needed.

Questions about Faculty Senate Presentation

  • Baccalaureate Core Reform
  • Category Themes and Templates
    • Responses were relatively positive over all, though there were some concerns about some verbiage used.
    • The maximum the Bacc Core can be is 45 credits.
    • Has any thought been given on how to reduce the courses within a category?
      • That will be handled with the implementation committee.
    • How is the implementation team being recruited and selected?
      • People with knowledge in university processes and curriculum will be involved in revamping the Bacc Core
    • Will there be an attempt to get more representation from different colleges on the implementation committee?
    • Full templates will be provided during the listening sessions.