Meeting Date: 
May 31, 2019
05/31/2019 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm
379 Weniger Hall
Event Description: 

A PDF of the minutes can be found here.

  1. Category II Reviews
    • HST 417
  1. Category Reviews
    • ANS 121
    • PH 205
    • PH 207
    • CH 232/232H
    • PH 104 – follow-up
    • PH 206

Voting members present: Kathy Becker-Blease, Natalie Dollar (remote), Daniel Faltesek, McKenzie Huber (remote), Filix Maisch, Bob Paasch, Weihong Qiu, Dana Sanchez, Inara Scott, Rorie Spill Solberg, Kaplan Yalcin
Voting members absent: Pat Ball, Nancy Barbour, Patrice Dragon, David Roundy
Ex-Officio members present: Faculty Affairs – Heath Henry; Ecampus – Craig Rademacher (remote); WIC Director – Vicki Tolar Burton

Category II Reviews

  • PHL 260
    • It is not clear if it is trying to be a philosophy class or a music class.
    • The assignments are vague
      • Only assignments are reading responses and it is not clear how these assignments meet the requirements.
    • It is difficult to determine if it meets the Language & the Arts category
      • It uses a lot of philosophy verbiage with no apparent focus on the analysis of music
      • If it eased down a little on the philosophy content to add more analysis content, it would be better.
    • There is a prompt assignment but there is no information on what this assignment entails. Requirements for the project will be requested.
    • With some creativity, it could possibly fit another category, like Western Culture or Social Processes
      • Not approved. The course does not fit the Languages & the Arts category, for which it is being submitted, and does not currently meet the requirements for any other categories.
  • HST 417
    • Approved with no discussion needed.
  • ATS 341
    • This course likely fits the category, however moderate improvements to the syllabus are needed before it can be approved.
    • Responses to the proposal questions did not clarify questions that the reviewer had.
      • There is little use of examples or details to understand how the course content will set a historical context for how climate change impacts not just the natural & human systems, but climate change interacts and impacts the science(s) and technologies that are being deployed to manage/mitigate/react to it.
      • STS courses are required to apply a multidisciplinary approach and to demonstrate the interrelationships among different subject areas. The course description somewhat does this, but needs further development to make the alignment and linkage between the Baccalaureate Core (BC) outcomes and the activities more clear.
      • Coverage of the first learning outcome (LO) is implied, but not very convincing that critical analysis would occur during quizzes.
      • The second LO is supposed to be assessed via homework but there is no information about the prompts or learning activities or how they are assessed.
      • The third LO seems covered well, but an assignment sheet should still be supplied.
      • The course has several course-specific LOs and some assignments not linked to the BC LOs. However, it is not clear to students in the syllabus that these are course specific.
        • Send back for revisions
  • PAX 301
    • It is unclear which writing assignment meets the 1,250 word minimum requirement.
    • The funding proposal is not clear if they will be using outside sources.
      • Send back with minor revisions.

Category Reviews

  • FW 454
    • Last submitted in May 2017 to tweak the description of the course.
    • The syllabus is no longer current.
    • There will be a follow-up with the College of Agricultural Sciences to see if the change is still wanted.
      • There has been difficulty getting the materials to update the syllabus and course in the system.
      • There is some discussion about whether the change was even still wanted.
    • The old syllabus does not link WIC outcomes or mention how they are assessed.
    • It is also not clear how they are meeting 2,000 word requirement.
      • There is a group project, but unless the students are each writing and revising 2,000 words, it does not meet the requirement.
    • It is unclear if the course meets the WIC requirements, especially since the syllabus is out of date.
      • Send back with notes about issues and questions on whether or not the change is still wanted (issues will still be discusses as it is up for category review in two years).
  • PH 213 – follow-up
    • It is unclear if the assignments meet the LOs, as no assignment instructions or details have been supplied.
    • One syllabus will serve as a base for the other campuses to build off.
    • An addendum was added to link the LOs and assessments.
      • Approved (also approve PH 211 and PH 212, which are similar).
  • ANS 121
    • No connection between assignments and the BC LOs
    • Is more focused on the major, rather than being a BC course open to all students
      • It’s applied and very specific with a high amount of DFW’s.
        • The instructor’s remark on the form that they have no plans to make changes to how the course is taught or delivered
          • Decertified
  • PH 205
    • Weak on historical connections but otherwise fine.
    • Recertified
  • PH 207
    • Weak on LOs one and three due to limited explanation of connections with basic concepts and theories. LO two is well done and it is advised that they put the same amount of detail into linking the others.
      • Send back for minor revisions.
  • CH 232/232H
    • Not discussed
  • PH 104 – follow-up
    • Hugely improved
    • Syllabus could be organized a little better but all the information is there.
      • Recertified
  • PH 206
    • Online, high DFW rate (6/16 DFW and of what remains, 6 got a C)
    • The instructor has listed the challenging aspects of each LO and its connected assignments, but they have stated in the form they have no plans to make changes.
    • Course is otherwise well-organized.
    • Would it be better taught on campus?
      • Recertified but suggest that some course changes are needed and the course may need to be redesigned.
  • PH 201
    • Missing a lot of minimum syllabus requirements
    • BC info is there
    • Recertified but inform the originators that their syllabus does not currently meet the minimum syllabus requirements.
  • PH 111
    • Does not include labs of any kind.
      • It was confirmed that there is a weekly lab, but there is absolutely no mention of a lab in the syllabus.
    • Geared towards K-8 science teacher majors.
    • No mention of how the course assesses outcomes and how assignments align with BC outcomes.
    • In terms of the BC, it is not open to other students. The Math pre-requisites are specifically CoEd courses. These pre-requisites are not enforced, though.
      • There are currently no CoEd students enrolled. Most students are CPHHS majors and likely have not met the pre-requisites for the course as they are college specific.
    • The course does not serve the purpose of the BC, or the CoEd as was originally intended.
      • Decertify, unless they resubmit with changes and responses to questions and explain how it serves purpose of the BC.