Curriculum Council

Voting members present: Joan Gross, Sue Helback, Prem Mathew, Mina Ossiander, Jeff Reimer, John Schuna, Michele Swift, Allen Thompson, Anne Zweber
Voting members absent: John Bailey, Tom Miller, Richard Nafshun
Ex-officio members present: Academic Affairs – Gary Beach; Graduate School – Stephanie Bernell; Registrar’s Office – Larry Bulling (v. Rebecca Mathern); University Libraries - Jane Nichols (v. Anne-Marie Deitering)
Liaison members present: Academic Advising Council – Brett Jeter; Instructional Technology – Jon Dorbolo; OSU Cascades – Marla Hacker (via phone)

 

Welcome, Introductions and Housekeeping

• Category II Proposals –
  • Reviewers are assigned to specific curricular proposals; the co-chairs send all Category II proposals weekly to all Council members for review and, if necessary, discuss. If there no issues identified, the proposals will be approved by the co-chairs.
  • The Curriculum Council also reviews program extensions to Ecampus; this is the only curricular review.
• Please inform Vickie if you’re going to be absent.

 

Category I Proposals

• Curriculum Council Category I Possible Review Questions

• It’s the responsibility of the Curriculum Council review and approve Category I proposals. Two reviewers are assigned to each proposal, and these individuals are responsible for thoroughly reviewing the proposal and presenting any concerns during a Council meeting. Other Council members are asked to review the proposals and be prepared to comment when the proposal is presented. 
• Abbreviated proposals are reviewed internally only (on campus).

• Renaming an Academic Program Proposal – Integrative Biology (Abbreviated proposal) – Reviewers needed
  • Pending reviews by Budgets & Fiscal Planning & Graduate Council

Action: Jon Dorbolo and John Schuna will present the proposal on October 27.

 

• New Undergraduate Minor – Applied Journalism Minor (Abbreviated proposal) – Reviewers needed

• This is a Category II proposal, so the unit reviewer is automatically assigned to review. It is tied to the AJ course designator.

 

Course Designator

• Course Designators – Procedural Steps
  • Larry Bulling outlined the extensive process required when new designators are requested and approved; it literally takes days and days, many staffing hours and involves multiple offices to accomplish.
• Proposal to Establish an AJ Course Designator

Action: Sue Helback will present the proposal on October 21.

 

Undergraduate Academic Program Reviewers Needed

• Academic Program Review Process – Two Curriculum Council members participate on all undergraduate program reviews. Review self-study from unit; attend a dinner the night prior to a full day of meetings with unit stakeholders; draft the report, which will be finalized by all reviewers during the next few weeks; and submit the report to Academic Programs, Assessment, and Accreditation (APAA). The Curriculum Council then reviews the report and, although the report can’t be revised, an addendum can be prepared by the Curriculum Council and appended to the report. The academic unit then develops an action plan based on report recommendations. The dean, provost and academic unit head review the action plan and recommendations. A three-year follow-up determines progress on recommendations.
• Programs are intended to be reviewed every 10 years; APAA is trying to schedule 8 per year.
• Curriculum Council Program Review Volunteers (only two dates have been confirmed):
  • Crop and Soil Science – Nov. 16-18  
    • Brett Jeter
  • Fisheries and Wildlife – January 22-24

• Allen Thompson, Mina Ossiander
  • Economics
    • Jeff Reimer, Steph Bernell
  • Psychology
    • Michele Swift, TBA
  • Horticulture
    • Sue Helback, TBA

 

Expedited Category II Proposal – Gary Beach

• Total of expedited proposals in Summer 2016 – 68%.
• Why expedite and not review? It’s faster. APAA works with the units to prepare the associated Category II proposals.
• Curriculum Council members were asked to review the proposal with whomever handles the majority of the proposals in their unit/college and determine whether there are missing categories or ones that should come to the Council for review.

Action: Discuss again on October 21, 2016.

 

Report from Academic Affairs

• Cheryl Hagey will hold a training session, likely one hour, to explain how to review Category II proposals – contact her if interested.
• APAA will staff tables at Training Days on November 9 from 2:00-4:00 PM in the LaSells Stewart Center. Topics covered will include Category I proposals, academic program reviews and assessment.
• Regarding Category II proposals, if something is missing or reviewers have a question, send the proposal back to the proposer with your inquiry – do not approve until your inquiry has been addressed.

 

Information Items:

• Ecampus Proposals approved during Summer 2016
  • Undergraduate Minor in Education
  • Undergraduate Certificate in Geographic Information Service

 

 

 

Minutes prepared by Vickie Nunnemaker, Faculty Senate staff