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, Bob Paasch, Rene Reitsma, David Roundy, Rorie Solberg, Kaplan Yalcin
Voting members absent: No members absent
Ex-Officio members present: Faculty Affairs – Heath Henry; DPD Director – Nana Osei-Kofi; Ecampus – Karen Watte
Guests present: Tamara Belknap

Curriculum Council Invitation
Friday, May 8, 2020 – 9:30 AM who wants to represent BCC?

• Writing and English courses that are 4 credits are only being taught for 3 hours a week. School Head of Writing, Literature and Film will be at the meeting to discuss pedagogical reasons for this rather than classroom capacity issues.
• This is something BCC discovered but is generally a larger university issue
  • The School of Writing, Literature & Film (SWLF) says that this is a deal made with the Curriculum Council to account for lack of classroom space.
    • The Curriculum Council has no record of this exception and the Registrar has confirmed there is no classroom shortage.
    • The School Head has responded and stated that it is not a lack of classroom space, but that they have a pedagogical reason for the fewer contact hours. He will be attending the meeting to argue why the exception should remain.
  • If SWLF is told to bring the courses into compliance, should the Baccalaureate Core (BC) courses be brought into compliance first before approving reviews or proposals?
    • It was noted that it is too late to bring these courses into alignment for Fall.
  • The Baccalaureate Core Committee (BCC) has two main concerns:
    • The committee is uncomfortable with the overall structure that allows for these courses to not meet University policies for contact hours while not being a hybrid course.
    • BC courses cannot be recertified or approved if they aren’t meeting University policies.
• Kathy and Bob will attend the meeting.

Summer Term Contemporary Global Issues Courses

• The May 1 deadline falls after Summer term registration.
  • Summer term courses are already in the catalog. Some of the Contemporary Global Issues (CGI) have since been decertified. Students have enrolled in these courses and may be expecting a BC credit.
  • The co-chairs recommend that they move their internal deadline back to April 1 to account for Summer term.
    • 12 courses affected – some full with a high enrollment number.
      • Several of these did not submit any materials for review.
      • Will these decertifications negatively affect student graduation? How will this affect students who are double dipping for major requirements and BC credits.
        • It was discussed that the courses should be decertified and the advisors should reach out to students affected to inform them of the BC status change.
          • There was concern about exposing the students to additional stress.
          • There was concern that students may miss the notification, even with multiple announcements via email or CANVAS.
          • The Council of Head Advisors (CHA) has the power to grant exceptions and apply the BC credit.
            • It was decided that an exception for Summer courses only would be the best way to address this without causing additional stress for students.
              • Motion to decertify these courses and allow advisors, for Summer 2020 only, to grant exceptions for CGI courses; seconded. The motion passed with 12 in favor, none against. There was 1 abstention.

Category Reviews

• Contemporary Global Issues    
  • Discussion Needed
    • AG 351 – asked for an extension
      • Sent back in early February with an April 30 deadline to resubmit. The recently emailed back requesting an extension.
      • The syllabus needed several revisions and lacked the writing assignment requirements.
      • It is currently double-listed with Social Processes and Institutions (SPI). APA was discussing dropping the SPI category with the submitter.
        • It could be a better fit for SPI, but the lack CGI information makes that difficult to determine. BC Learning Outcomes (LOs) are grouped together into one list, rather than listing them by category.
          • Motion to deny the extension; seconded. The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
    • ANTH 352
      • Missing their syllabi from OSU-Cascades and Corvallis campus.
      • The Ecampus syllabus has no connections between assessment and LOs. Poor connections between activities and assessment.
      • One of the Ecampus sections has a high grade skew with mostly As. The rest were Fs.
      • Ecampus syllabus lacks a submission table.
        • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
    • ANTH 374
      • Submission is missing the Ecampus syllabus.
      • The writing assignment does not specify how many outside sources are required.
        • It was confirmed that there is a note about the number of required sources elsewhere on the syllabus.
      • The course content is a good match for CGI but the syllabus lacks connections to outcomes and details on assessment. The missing syllabus is a major concern.
        • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
    • FE/FOR 456
      • The writing assignment is listed as a group assignment, rather than an individual assignment.
      • It’s clear the course meets the LO requirements, but the syllabus lacks a detailed explanation on how the course meets the LOs.
      • The committee strongly recommends the instructor works with APA in the future.
      • The course is a major requirement for several Forestry programs and is largely attended by students in those programs
        • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed 11 in favor, none against. There was 1 abstention.
    • GEOG 300
      • The syllabus has no detailed connections between course activities, outcomes and assessment.
      • The resubmission has not done everything asked of the committee to fix the issues.
        • They did fix the writing assignment requirements.
          • Motion to decertify; seconded. The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There was one 1 abstention.
    • GEOG 331
      • No detailed connections between course and assessment.
      • The resubmission has not done everything asked of the committee to fix the issues.
      • Writing assignment requirements are unclear – no word count or clear topic
        • The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There was one 1 abstention.
    • GEOG 350
      • The syllabus has no detailed connections between course and assessment.
      • The resubmission has not done everything asked of the committee to fix the issues.
        • The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There was one 1 abstention.
    • PS 354
      • Note they need to update course material. Its current focus is on the Obama administration, so it is not a contemporary issue.
      • Motion to recertify with note to update material; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
    • TRAL 479
      • There was debate in the previous meeting about whether or not humans losing their connection to nature is a global issue.
        • There is no debate or forum to make a choice about this issue.
          • This may be too philosophical to truly meet the spirit of the category.
            • Motion to recertify; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
    • WGSS 350
      • Everyone who finishes the class gets an A. They provide a detail explanation as to why, but is it appropriate for a BC course?
        • The BCC has no purview over how an instructor chooses to grade their course. Could open a much wider debate.
      • Not all of the noted issues were addressed in the resubmission.
        • Most of the still needed fixes are very small
        • The BCC would prefer a more clear explanation on why the course meets the category.
          • There is an explanation buried deep in the course description. Moving it to the category description would make it more obvious.
        • There is no mention of how many outside sources are required for the final paper.
          • Motion to recertify pending requested changes; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
    • WGSS 380
      • Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies is requesting extensions.
        • Motion to recertify with note to update material; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
        • Motion to deny extension; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
  • No Discussion Needed
    • ANTH 484
      • Motion to recertify; seconded. 9 in favor, none against, no abstentions
    • PS 341
      • Motion to recertify; seconded. 9 in favor, none against, no abstentions
        • Did FW 325, HST 317 or HST 488 ever resubmit?
          • HST 317 submitted
            • All syllabi have been improved.
              • Motion to recertify; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
              • HST 488 has one more day to resubmit – otherwise decertification goes through
                • FW 325 has one more day to resubmit – co-chair has reached out to submitter
    • Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies head has asked for extensions
    • Motion to deny extension; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions.
  • Science
    • GEO 202
      • The LOs are not well labeled. They are reworded later in the syllabus, which could cause confusion.
        • Motion to recertify with a note that they label LOs more clearly; seconded. The motion passed 9 in favor, none against. There were no abstentions
    • RNG 121
      • Discussion of this course moved to the top of the agenda.
      • One class sticks out with a high A grade distribution
      • They did not submit their Ecampus syllabus
        • They are working with APA. The Ecampus instructor submitted the on-campus syllabus and will be making the changes to the Ecampus syllabus based on work done to the on-campus syllabus.
      • They are missing the Reach Out statement
      • Difficult to read, but all the information is there.
        • This is a result of the work with APA to get all the information there.
          • Motion to recertify with note to mirror Ecampus syllabus to on-campus syllabus and add the Reach Out statement; seconded. The motion passed 12 in favor, none against. There was 1 abstention.