Baccalaureate Core Committee

All members attended remotely.

Voting members present: Heather Arbuckle, Aidas Banaitis, Kathryn Becker Blease, Daniel Faltesek, Andrew Harker, McKenzie Huber, Matthew Kennedy, Filix Maisch, Lori McGraw, Steven Morris, Rorie Solberg, Rene Reitsma, David Roundy, Kaplan Yalcin
Voting members absent: Bob Paasch
Ex-Officio members present: Faculty Affairs – Heath Henry; Ecampus – Karen Watte; WIC Director – Anita Helle
Guests present: Tam Belknap

Discussion

• Contemporary Global Issues Courses and Category Review Data: Total 54 courses
  • Recertified: 19
  • Decertified:  12
  • Decertified with opportunity to re-submit but has not done so:  9
  • Tentatively can be recertified, waiting on reviewer or today’s agenda: 14
• Science Courses and Category Review Data: Total 11 courses
  • Recertified: 2 series/sets (7 courses)
  • Conditional Recertification: 1
  • Decertified with opportunity to re-submit but has not done so: 3
• Writing Intensive Curriculum Courses and Category Review Data: Total 2 courses
  • Recertified: 1
  • Decertified: 1
    • Deadline is May 1 for catalog submissions
    • Courses that did not submit by the March deadline were automatically decertified
    • Some WIC proposals should be coming through next week.

Course Proposals

• Discussion Needed
  • HDFS 260 – Social Processes & Institutions
    • Will be moved to next week’s agenda
  • SOC 482 – Science, Technology & Society
    • It was previously requested that they make changes to the language regarding connections between outcomes and assessment
    • They did make the requirements for the writing assignment more clear on the syllabus.
    • The committee suggested that they add the matrix to the syllabus but they sent it in as a separate document.
      • Motion to send back with a clarification that the committee wants transparency in the syllabus and that the matrix should be added into the syllabus itself; seconded. The motion passed with 14 in favor, none against, with no abstentions.
• No Discussion Needed
  • FW 439 – Writing Intensive Curriculum
    • Working with school head to lower enrollment cap
    • Approved with no discussion needed
  • PHL 330 – Science, Technology & Society
    • Approved with no discussion needed
  • ED 218 – Difference, Power & Discrimination (DPD)
    • The on-campus syllabus has Ecampus language. It does meet all the DPD requirements but there is concerns that the syllabus is otherwise somewhat lacking.
    • Submitted as a hybrid course, but that appears to have been an error, based on the lecture details. It is suggested that they may need to reach out to Janice Nave-Abele to remove that from the CIM proposal.
      • Motion to approve for the Baccalaureate Core (BC) but make a note for the Curriculum Council and Janice Nave-Abele about concerns; seconded. The motions passes with 12 in favor, none against, with no abstentions.

Contemporary Global Issues Category Reviews

• ANTH 374
  • Will be moved to next week’s agenda.
• ANTH 383
  • The course does not meet the minimum syllabus requirements. It has outdated language, no verbatim BC statement and no reach out statement.
  • The syllabus lacks a matrix and otherwise has no information on how the learning outcomes (LOs) are assessed.
  • There is no separation between the BC LOs and the course specific LOs.
  • The reflection papers are intended to meet the writing assignment requirements for Contemporary Global Issues (CGI) but they do not fulfill the requirement.
  • They did submit their Ecampus syllabus
    • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed with 14 in favor, none against, with no abstentions.
• ANTH 484
  • Will be moved to next week’s syllabus
• COMM 446
  • There is no clear description on how it meets the CGI category. It also does not explain how the outcomes are being met. The form does also does not provide enough information on how the LOs are met.
  • The final paper is based on in-class simulations and requires no outside sources. It also does not meet the length requirements.
    • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed with 13 in favor, none against, with no abstentions.
• FE/FOR 456
  • Will be moved to next week’s agenda
• FES 365
  • The three courses used to wildly differ between instructors. They are now down to two instructors and they are meeting and aligning their syllabi. There are still minor issues.
    • Motion to recertify; seconded. The motion passed with 13 in favor, none against, with none abstaining.
• H 312
  • There is no information on the syllabus about the writing assignment requirements. The instructional documents provided make it clear that it does not meet the minimum requirements.
    • The instructor has responded that he sees no issues with his writing assignments and does not see why they need revising.
  • The instructor did not submit a revised Ecampus syllabus but noted that he would revise the Ecampus syllabus after the on-campus syllabus received a pass.
  • Most course sessions exceed the 70 student cap. There is an exception in place provided the instructors have sufficient Teaching Assistant (TA) support. While the course did have the support last year, it is unclear if it still has the same level of support.
    • The instructor is leaving the university. How will the course be handled after he leaves?
      • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed with 13 in favor, none against, with none abstaining.
• PS 341
  • An Ecampus syllabus was not provided and the Ecampus portion is not mentioned at all in the form.
  • There is a grade disparity between Ecampus and On-campus. Ecampus students get either an A or an F, with no B’s, C’s or D’s. On-campus students have a more even grade distribution.
    • The Ecampus portion is largely managed by Grad students
  • The On-campus instructor acknowledges that there is an issue with assessment for LOs one and three, but offers no solutions to fix them.
  • The writing assignment meets the CGI requirements, but without the Ecampus syllabus and a complete lack of information within the form, it is impossible to determine if it meets the requirements.
    • Motion to decertify with a chance to resubmit with missing Ecampus information by April 27; seconded. The motion passed with 12 in favor, none against, with none abstaining.
• PS 354
  • Will be moved to next week’s agenda.
• SUS 350
  • They changed the writing assignment as requested on the syllabus, but did not make the change on the attached instructions.
    • Motion to recertify with note to the instructor to align the directions with the syllabus; seconded. The motion passed with 12 in favor, none against, with none abstaining.
• TRAL 479
  • Will be moved to next week’s agenda.
• WGSS 380
  • There seems to be an issue of coordination between the submitter and the graduate student who wrote the syllabus.
  • The LOs appear to be for Cultural Diversity, not CGI. They are correctly addressed in the form, though. The course otherwise seems to be in order.
    • Decertify with a chance to resubmit by April 27; seconded. The motion passed with 11 in favor, none against, with none abstaining.
• Z 349
  • Assessment needs to be connected to the outcomes on the syllabus. This could be fixed with the matrix in the form.
    • Motion to recertify with notes to add the matrix to the syllabus; seconded. The motion passed with 12 in favor, none against, with none abstaining.