Baccalaureate Core Committee

Voting members present: Abigail Crowell, Kelsey Emard, Daniel Faltesek, Colin Johnson, Matthew Kennedy, Lori McGraw, Rene Reitsma, Randy Rosenberger, Kari-Lyn Sakuma, Thomas Shelly, Paula Weiss
Voting members absent: Aidas Banaitis, Geoffrey Barstow
Ex-officio members present: Academic Affairs – Heath Henry; Difference, Power & Oppression – Natchee Barnd; Ecampus – Karen Watte; WIC – Sarah Perrault
Guests: Patrick Ball, Stephanie Baugh, John Edwards, McKenzie Huber, Kristin Nagy-Catz, Caryn Stoess

Welcome and Introductions

• The committee members, ex-officios and guests introduced themselves and the units they represent.

Baccalaureate Core Committee Standing Rule Changes

• Current Standing Rules:

The Baccalaureate Core Committee (BCC) has the authority to develop and approve strategy, policy and planning for the Baccalaureate Core.

The Baccalaureate Core Committee reviews the content and appropriateness of both existing and proposed baccalaureate core courses. The committee shall conduct periodic reviews of the overall baccalaureate core program, and of existing courses within this program, to ensure that the criteria of the general education model are being met and to evaluate student attainment of category learning outcomes. This work depends on the availability of data to be provided by university administration at the request of the Baccalaureate Core Committee. The committee shall also evaluate proposals for additional and new courses deemed relevant to the core and stimulate proposals for additional and new courses as deemed necessary and advise faculty members in the preparation of such proposals.

The Committee shall consist of fourteen faculty and two students. At least two of the voting faculty members shall be from the College of Liberal Arts, at least two from the College of Science, and in so far as possible, at least one from each college responsible for granting standalone Bachelor Degrees. OSU-Cascades shall have one voting representative on the Committee. The voting membership shall also consist of one professional academic advisor and up to two other professional faculty who are involved in either instruction, advising and/or curriculum. No college shall form a majority of the committee. In addition, the following shall be ex-officio members, non-voting: the Writing Intensive Curriculum program director, the Difference, Power, and Discrimination program director, an Undergraduate Education representative appointed by the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and an Ecampus representative appointed by the Associate Provost for Ecampus.

• Course Selection
  • The BCC may solicit courses, which include detailed descriptions and outlines, from all colleges/departments.
  • All existing, modified and new courses proposed by individual faculty, groups of faculty, or departments for inclusion in general education must be approved by an appropriate faculty curriculum committee within the college of origin prior to BCC submission.
  • All submissions shall be routed for additional curriculum review at the discretion of the BCC. Request for such reviews, and selection of the reviewing unit, will be made by the BCC. The criteria used to select the reviewing unit will be based upon that unit's ability to assess the specific general education objectives proposed.
  • All submissions that deal with WRI and WRII must be routed to the Writing Advisory Board, which is composed of the Writing Intensive Curriculum Director, the Director of First Year Writing, the Director of the Writing Center, and a writing faculty member with expertise in technical and professional writing. This Board will consult with faculty to develop and implement proposals that meet Baccalaureate Core criteria.
  • The BCC will review all submissions to assure compliance with the criteria adopted by the Faculty Senate; those courses which are deemed by the BCC to meet these criteria and address the category learning outcomes can be approved for inclusion as general education courses, subject to approval by the Curriculum Council.
  • The Baccalaureate Core Committee has the authority to request changes to existing courses and/or deny continuation of Baccalaureate Core status for courses.
  • A majority of the Baccalaureate Core Committee voting members present is required to approve or deny the status of any Baccalaureate Core course.
• Category Reviews
  • The BCC will periodically request and review institutional data in order to evaluate Baccalaureate Core categories based on:
    • adequate access to courses within the category;
    • consistency of category criteria and learning outcomes with institutional goals for undergraduate learning;
    • evidence of students achieving satisfactory success relative to category learning outcomes; and
    • continued satisfaction of category criteria by individual courses.
  • The BCC has the authority to request changes to existing courses and/or deny continuation of Baccalaureate Core status for courses.
  • A majority of the Baccalaureate Core Committee voting members present is required to approve or deny the status of any Baccalaureate Core course.
• Changes in Core or Criteria or Process
  • Any changes in the Baccalaureate Core or the supporting criteria or the process will require the approval of the Faculty Senate.

• Suggested Revisions
  • Changing the name of the BCC to the Core Education Committee (CEC)

Action: Motion to change name of the committee to Core Education Committee, seconded. The motion passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes against and 0 abstentions.

• The committee also discussed the removal and change of verbiage regarding the committee’s membership as documented in the linked revisions above. The committee made suggestions for the verbiage.
  • The co-chairs will consult with Alix Gitelman regarding ex-officio roles
• Addition of verbiage around the interpretation of Core Education Learning Outcomes, Criteria and Rational. The committee made several suggestions regarding the verbiage.
  • The committee will discuss transparency clause additions.
  • Acronyms will be cross-checked.
  • The committee will vote on these revisions at a later date.

Chat Log

10:11:54 From McKenzie Huber (she/her) To Everyone:

          For our upcoming agenda topic: https://senate.oregonstate.edu/baccalaureate-core-committee

10:20:40 From Thomas Shelly To Everyone:

          moving at breakneck speed!

10:22:47 From McKenzie Huber (she/her) To Everyone:

          Beaver Core was too close to Beaver Hub —

10:25:12 From Edwards, John A To Everyone:

          It is bachelor’s degree.  Note apostrophe

10:31:26 From Caryn Stoess To Everyone:

          To clarify my suggestion, I was thinking an ex-officio from Curriculum Management in addition to Heath as ex-officio from Assessment.

10:32:01 From Lori McGraw To Everyone:

          Good not to forget that issue, Caryn.

10:33:50 From McKenzie Huber (she/her) To Everyone:

          Assessment representative appointed by…?

10:34:29 From Kristin Nagy Catz To Everyone:

10:34:30 From Kelsey Emard (she/her) To Everyone:

10:43:30 From Edwards, John A To Everyone:

          Isn’t theater a performing art?????????????????????

10:43:45 From Edwards, John A To Everyone:

          Sorry, didn’t mean to have 18 question marks.

10:43:58 From Lori McGraw To Everyone:

          I thought the question marks were amusing :)

10:44:34 From Lori McGraw To Everyone:

          That would be a slippery slope :)

10:44:36 From McKenzie Huber (she/her) To Everyone:

          Theater reached out to ask, so I am assuming they didn’t see themselves as performing arts?

10:47:10 From McKenzie Huber (she/her) To Everyone:

          Would we document the interpretation to create a historical record?

10:47:52 From McKenzie Huber (she/her) To Everyone:

          It would also create consistency as committee members and composition changes over the years

10:48:28 From Randall Rosenberger To Everyone:

          Instead of "does not substantively alter" change to "aligns with"

10:50:15 From Kristin Nagy Catz To Everyone:

          Isn’t it “does align”?

10:53:34 From Thomas Shelly To Everyone:

          could we send it back to them then?

10:55:10 From Kelsey Emard (she/her) To Everyone:

          Perhaps add "To achieve transparency, the Director of Core Education will document interpretation decisions and make these decisions available on the Core Education website." ???

10:57:07 From Lori McGraw To Everyone:

          I like Kelsey's phrase. And, sometimes these meetings really do entail deep discussion. We ultimately make good decisions, I think.