Baccalaureate Core Committee Meeting February 25, 2019

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

Category II Reviews

• FW 391
  • Term Project instruction is provided separately; the committee would like it to be provided within the syllabus.
    • Send back for minor revisions.
• NMC 101
  • The syllabus seems disorganized, with assessment and links to Baccalaureate Core (BC) Learning Outcomes (LOs) scattered throughout.
    • The committee would like the instructor to put anything related to assessment in one place so it is easy for students to locate.
      • Send back for minor revisions
• H 338
  • It is not stated how BC LOs are assessed.
    • Send back and request statements regarding how the LOs are assessed.
• HSC 375
  • The minimum word requirement (1,250) is not stated within the syllabus and there is no explicit statement about students using outside resources.
  • Assignments are assessed and linked back to outcomes.
  • Send back with a request to change the verbiage in the assignment instructions to make the required minimum word-count and the use of two sources more explicit.
• SOC 448/548
  • There is no explanation on how the course meets the Difference, Power & Discrimination (DPD) requirements or how it is assessed.
  • There is no mention of assessment for the BC LOs and assignments are not linked to them.
    • Send back with suggestions for revisions

Category Reviews

• PH 213
  • Similar issues to PH 211 and PH 212
  • It is evident they meet the LOs based on what the labs are, but it should be stated in the syllabus
  • They are missing the Cascades syllabus
  • High D, F, Withdraw (DFW) rate in Fall – it is uncertain why – the class is an anomaly when compared to other courses by the same instructor
    • Send back for revisions and request for Cascades syllabus and to resubmit
• GEO 201
  • Reviewer not present to discuss
• WSE 210
  • No connections to course material or assessment within the syllabus
  • How are the LOs formally measured? It is not fully explained in the syllabus
  • The instructor is leaving OSU and it is unclear if the course will be continue being taught
  • It is unclear how it meets physical science requirements
    • Return with requests to clarify whether the course will be taught by a new instructor and request changes to the syllabus.
• SUS 102
  • Grades skewed with a high A passing (60%) and very low DFW
  • There seems to be a lot of effort to reach out to students with a lot of extra credit available. Students can earn up to 40% through extra credit.
  • It is noted that a lot of engineering students take the class
  • There is no data on how many students used the course for the BC requirement and how many took the course for the double degree requirement
  • 5 instructors and 8 GTAs
  • Recertify – comment about high A rate
    • Does the high extra credit rate affect this?
• AG 445
  • Submitted as a Writing II course but they have not had a liaison review the course
  • Send back with concerns about the lack of a liaison