Baccalaureate Core Committee

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

CIM Review

• PAC 136
  • Approved with no discussion needed.
• PAC 331
  • Assessment of learning outcomes is rather vague.
    • Use of consistent language in the syllabus would help make this clearer (participation vs practice vs field experience).
  • PAC courses are supposed to be lower division, but most PAC courses are 300 level.
    • PAC 300 level courses cannot be used for upper division credit
    • Missing ALI verbiage that is used in other PAC courses. Should it be included?

Action: Motion to send back with notes - use consistent vocabulary throughout the syllabus, address spelling errors within syllabus and add ALI to the title and add ALI disclaimer to course description; motion seconded and passed with 7 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

Science, Technology & Society (STS) Category Review

• AEC 353
  • Does not have a multidisciplinary perspective.
    • As the category is currently written, it is not an issue for an economics course to not have a multidisciplinary perspective
    • Examines marine resources issues through an economics lens.
  • Has enforced economics pre-requisites.
    • The pre-requisites are Baccalaureate Core (BC) perspective courses.

Action: Motion to recertify; motion seconded and passed with 8 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

• BB 332
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• BI 345
  • Writing assignment has been fixed.
  • Assessment has been aligned to outcomes. Descriptions need to be enhanced somewhat; APA will reach out to the instructor to assist with alignment and assessment.

Action: Motion to recertify; motion seconded and passed with 8 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

• BI 347
  • Writing assignment has been fixed.

Action: Motion to recertify; motion seconded and passed with 7 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

• BOT 324
  • Approved with no discussion needed.
• CS 391/391H
  • Did not respond to the question about why 75% of enrollment is engineering students.
  • Other major issues were addressed.
  • The verbiage is somewhat vague for the writing assignments; it is not clear on the syllabus that any of the writing assignments meet the category requirements.
  • APA will reach out to the instructor about the writing assignment.
  • The committee will table discussion on this course until March 30 to get clarification on writing assignment.
• EAH 411
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• FW 350
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• FW 360
  • Most issues have not been addressed.
    • Lacking category learning outcomes
    • Lacking connections between assessment and alignment
    • Verbatim statement is listed as a learning outcome
  • They did address some of the issues with the writing assignment but did not show how it topically aligns to the category.

Action: Motion to decertify for the following issues - did not add learning outcomes, missing content alignment and assessment, paper topic needs to align to category; motion seconded and passed with 8 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 votes in abstention.

• GEO 305
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• GEO 307
  • Moved to March 30
• GEO 331
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• GEO 380
  • Issues have been addressed
  • Unclear if writing assignment takes a multidisciplinary approach.
    • Does meet other requirements.
    • It’s not well articulated in the syllabus, but it does seem to be multidisciplinary.
    • There is verbiage in the matrix of the syllabus that better explains the assignment.

Action: Motion to recertify with note to instructor to speak with college leadership about confusion around writing assignment; motion seconded and passed with 7 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 1 vote in abstention.

• H 445
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• HST 481
  • Course seems to be trying to fit STS and Difference, Power & Discrimination (DPD).
  • Course does not seem to meet many STS requirements.
  • Unclear if writing assignment is topically appropriate
  • Seems very light on science.
  • The Ecampus syllabus is well done, but the Corvallis syllabus continues to be very lacking – they did fix the issue of the missing verbatim BC statement.
    • The matrix provides more information and it does seem from the matrix that the course is meeting the learning outcomes for STS.
  • Some committee members needed to leave, breaking quorum. The committee will have to continue discussing this course on March 15.
  • The committee would like to encourage the instructor to reach out to the Ecampus instructor or APA to bring their syllabus up to the same standard of the Ecampus syllabus. The chairs will also reach out to unit leadership to notify them of the issue.
• NSE 319
  • Moved to March 30
• TOX 360
  • Recertified with no discussion needed.
• BI 420
  • Moved to March 30