Meeting Date: 
October 5, 2023
10/05/2023 10:00 am to 11:00 am
  1. Baccalaureate Core Committee Standing Rule Revisions
  1. Course Adaption and Design Institute (CADI)
    • Ecampus expedited review process questions

Voting members present: Aidas Banaitis, Abigail Crowell, Kelsey Emard, Daniel Faltesek, Colin Johnson, Matthew Kennedy, Lori McGraw, Rene Reitsma, Kari-Lyn Sakuma, Paula Weiss
Voting members absent: Geoffrey Barstow, Randy Rosenberger, Thomas Shelly
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, Mike Jefferies, Kristin Nagy-Catz, Caryn Stoess


Baccalaureate Core Committee Standing Rule Revisions

  • 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.

  • Acronyms were removed from the Standing Rules in the revisions.
  • The co-chairs spoke with Alix Gitelman regarding verbiage related to her office for Ex-Officios and the additional of one other XO for that office.
  • Addition of the Core Education Director as an XO.
  • Move language related to quorum higher up in the Standing Rules.

Action: Motion to accept the revisions to the membership, seconded. Motion passed 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

  • Removed proposed language related to the interpretation clause to avoid confusion.
  • Transparency related to committee decisions are posted online on the committee site via the minutes.

Course Adaption and Design Institute (CADI)

  • Ecampus expedited review process questions
    • How do expedited reviews work? How do they move through the Ecampus proposal system?
      • To add an Ecampus course to the Baccalaureate Core/Core Education
        • Is the on-campus version of the course already Baccalaureate Core?
        • Faculty work with Ecampus to insure requirements are met.
          • The Ecampus does not do a deep review into the Baccalaureate Core/Core Education learning outcomes.
        • If somebody who is currently offering a class as on campus and Ecampus and they now submit a change to category for on campus. A year later, an expedited ecampus proposal is submitted. The Baccalaureate Core/Core Education Committee would not see have seen that Ecampus syllabus to insure it meets the learning outcomes – how is the course checked to insure it meets learning outcomes/matches the on campus version by Ecampus?
          • Any change in category triggers speaking with Ecampus for redevelopment
          • Ecampus is working to touch base with faculty regarding development and redevelopment of Ecampus courses.
    • When should the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) be submitted during the process?
      • Agreements should be happening in parallel.
      • Statements of Intent were due in July.
        • There seems to have been some miscommunication and not many proposals have come through for Ecampus development in time before the new Core Education program rolls out.
        • A mass ping to the college designees will be sent out with clarification to work with OSU-Cascades and Ecampus regarding development. CADI and Ecampus development need to be completed before submitting to CIM.
        • Committee members can touch base with their designees to insure information is be disseminated.