Meeting Date: 
December 9, 2021
Date: 
12/09/2021 12:30 pm to 2:00 pm
Location: 
Zoom Meeting
Agenda: 
  1. Category Reviews – Science, Technology & Society
    • Discussion needed
      • HST 440
      • ENT/HORT 330
      • HEST 412
      • FW 360
      • GEOG 340
      • H 445
      • HST 416
      • HSTS 417
      • PAX 301
    • No discussion needed
      • WSE 385
Minutes: 

Voting members present: Heather Arbuckle, Ivan Arismendi, Aidas Banaitis, Geoffrey Barstow, Daniel Faltesek, Kelsey Emard, Jack Istok, Lori McGraw, Rene Reitsma, Randy Rosenberger, Justin St. Germain, Kaplan Yalcin
Voting members absent:  Matthew Kennedy, Kyle Niemeyer
Ex-officio members present: Ecampus – Karen Watte, Office of Undergraduate Education – Heath Henry, WIC – Sarah Perrault
Guests: Funmi Amobi, McKenzie Huber, Dwaine Plaza

Category Reviews – Science, Technology & Society

  • Discussion needed
    • HST 440
      • The course does a good job addressing the learning outcomes (LOs).
      • Lacks the Baccalaureate Core (BC) verbatim statement.
      • Final written assignment is reflective and does not meet the requirements of LO 3.

Action: Motion to decertify – verbatim statement, shift the final writing assignment to meet the requirement as it is not the criticism paper and does not require sources; motion seconded and passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • ENT/HORT 330
    • Focuses on an artistic and cultural aspect of relation of insects and humans.
    • How is entomology a discipline and how have the changes to the field affected society and how has it been affected by society?
    • Did not submit a Corvallis syllabus.
    • Lacking assessment and connections between activities and LOs.
    • Writing assignment does not meeting minimum requirements.

Action: Motion to decertify – lacks essential elements including a reflection on the discipline of entomology, the evolution of this science and related technology, and the writing assignment does not meet the category; motion seconded and passed with 10 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 1 vote in abstention.

  • HEST 412/512
    • More focused on graduate students exploring case studies and not so much on preparing students to critically think about engineering technology and doesn’t focus much on the historical aspect.
    • Writing assignment does not meet the category requirements.
    • No mention of how LOs are assessed.
    • No connections between course activities and LOs.
    • No mention of the BC on the syllabus.
    • No course schedule provided.
    • No Core data provided.

 

Action: Motion to decertify – to decertify for missing connections LO1 and 2, missing proper LO 3; needs to envision the evolution of humanitarian engineering, major revisions; motion seconded and passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • FW 360
    • Not enough focus on the societal aspect.
    • No reference or acknowledgement to Bacc Core on the syllabus at all – no verbatim statement.
    • No connections of LOs to activities or assessment.
    • LO 1 poorly addressed
    • Final paper allows students to pick from various topics and not all of these are a good fit for the category.

Action: Motion to decertify – the syllabus provided is not one for a BC course, as such there is no attempt to evaluate LO 1 or 2; there was no meaningful attempt to assess the category, the paper prompt does not engage the requirements; the social dimension of the category is absent, this reflects the aggregate conditions by which we live and are organized, not merely a description of humans or their impact; motion seconded and passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • GEOG 340
    • Not discussed
  • H 445
    • LO 1 not really addressed in most of the syllabi. Only one of the provided syllabi has a reading assignment that somewhat addresses it.
    • Writing assignment is not appropriate for the category.

Action: Motion to decertify – the course is a major course it is not a critical investigation of the production of occupational health it is a normative major course in occupational health; needs to assess LO1 and LO2; there is no social dimension investigation. Paper needs to be rethought as a critical project, not a normative description; motion seconded and passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • HST 416
    • Approved with no discussion needed.
  • HSTS 417
    • No longer a WIC course, but there is still a lot of WIC information in some of the syllabi.
    • Course specific outcomes differ from syllabus to syllabus.
    • Inconsistencies between syllabi – Ecampus missing BC verbatim statement; Two syllabi do not list modality. Another syllabus has an unclear writing assignment.

Action: Motion to recertify and to encourage instructor to check their syllabi for modality statements and consistency in writing assignments; motion seconded and passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • PAX 301
    • Previously addressed by the committee.
    • In addition to previously stated issues, the content of the course focuses heavily on the societal aspect and devotes very little time to Science and Technology. It feels like it might be a better fit for Social Processes & Institutions (SPI), if it were a lower division course.

Action: Motion to decertify and require a more systematic investigation of the dimension of science and technology, including specific details about science and technology that explain and engage the technical and scientific contexts in question to balance an integrate with the critical dimension; motion seconded and passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • IB 420
    • 11 students – all science students and the course has several science pre-requisites. It is a disciplinary course.
    • Lacks BC verbatim statement.
    • No BC LOs listed on the syllabus.
    • No information about assessment on the syllabus.
    • Writing assignment potentially a good topic for the category.

Action: Motion to decertify – lack of assessment information in the syllabus, there is a non-syllabus table that includes relevant information but that is not enough; it is clear that this is an excellent majors course in this sense it does not meet any of the three outcomes; motion seconded and passed with 12 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • HSTS 423
    • Does the focus on a historical perspective make it a critical perspective?
    • Iteration/revision leading into the final project is questionable.
    • It’s unclear why the course is 4 credits, rather than 3?

Action: Motion to decertify to develop the interdisciplinary nature of the course such as politics/education/others mentioned and to be specific about the science/technology in question; motion seconded and passed with 12 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

  • No discussion needed
    • WSE 385
      • Approved with no discussion needed.