Faculty Assembly Minutes: March 25, 2011

Registering Attendance

Professor Byers, Chair, called the Assembly to order.

The minutes of the Assembly of January  28, 2011, were approved as distributed.

The Chair recognized Professor Williams, who moved, seconded by the Curriculum Committee, the approval of the document  titled “Rationale and Proposed Criteria for Culminating Undergraduate Experience Courses in the College of Arts and Sciences.” 

The Chair clarified that only the criteria for the CUE courses constituted the motion on the floor.

The Chair recognized Professor K’Meyer  who asked how the phrase  “demonstrate a mastery of content in the major”  in criterion 3 was to be interpreted.  Discussion included Professors K’Meyer, Theriot,  and Polzer.

Following this discussion, the Chair proposed  that the minutes include the clarification that  the phrase “content in the major” was not intended to imply all content of the major.  The Chair requested  and was given consent of the house to include this clarification in the minutes.

Further discussion of criterion 3, specifically the phrase “reflect on accumulated content and experience” included Professors K’Meyer, Williams, Steffen, Leichty, Weissbach, Meeks,  and Polzer.

Professor Polzer moved, seconded by Professor Stenger, that criterion 3 be amended to read:  “The course must provide the opportunity for students to demonstrate a mastery of content in the major  and to apply critical thinking skills to accumulated content and experience.” 

Discussion included Professors Weissbach, Williams, Beggan, Jarosi,  K’Meyer, Polzer, and Yohannes. 

Hearing no call for further discussion on the amendment to criterion 3, the chair put the question and the motion to amend carried. 

The Chair then called for additional discussion of the main motion, as amended.

Professor Ryan moved striking  “authentic” in criterion 4.  The motion was seconded. 

Discussion included Professors Steffen, Roebuck, Stenger, Weissbach, and Williams. 
The Chair put the question on the motion to strike “authentic”  in criterion 4.  The motion carried and criterion 4, as amended,  would read:  “The course must address issues, problems, or concerns relevant to the field or discipline.”

The Chair recognized Professor Rabin, who proposed the deletion of  criterion 4 altogether.  The motion was seconded.

Discussion included Professors Steffen, K’Meyer, Theriot, Polzer, Wolfe, Jarosi, Stenger, and Weissbach. 

The Chair put the question on the motion to strike criterion 4.  The motion failed.

The Chair recognized Professor Stenger who moved to amend criterion 4 by the addition of the word “current”  before  “...issues, problems....”   The motion was seconded.

Discussion included Professors Nunez, Stenger, and Jarosi. 

The Chair requested unanimous consent for the motion.  Consent was denied.

The Chair put the question on the motion to amend by addition of the word “current.”  The motion carried.  Criterion 4 would read:  “The course must address current issues, problems, or concerns relevant to the field or discipline.”

The Chair asked if there was further discussion of the main motion, as amended.

Hearing no call for further discussion, the Chair put the question on the motion to approve the criteria for CUE courses, as amended.  The motion carried.  [The document, as revised, is attached at the end of these minutes.]

The Chair then recognized Professor Eckert , who moved, seconded by the Personnel Committee, changes to the student course evaluation form. 

Discussion included Professors Polzer, Rabin, Leung, Ferre, and  Wise. 

Professor Wise proposed that the Assembly discuss items 1-16 on the evaluation form as a unit and accept the committee’s proposed change to item 3 (from “Was a syllabus distributed in the first or second class meeting?” to “Were you given access to a syllabus during the first week of the course?”).

Discussion included Professors Weissbach, Burton, K’Meyer, Leung, Bradley, and Wise.

Professor Rabin moved item 3 be amended to read “Were you given access to a syllabus during the first week you were enrolled in the course?”    The motion was seconded.   

The chair put the question and the motion to amend carried.

Members of the Assembly requested clarification of the effect of the word “enrolled”  on the statement.  Discussion included Professors  Jarosi, Gregg, Polzer, Theriot,  and Dietrich.

Professor Wise, having voted in the affirmative,  moved reconsideration of the motion to amend.  The motion to reconsider was seconded.  The motion carried.

Discussion included Professors Negry, Kopelson, and Weissbach. 

Hearing no call for further discussion, the Chair put the question on removing the word “enrolled” from item 3 as amended.   The motion carried and “enrolled” was deleted.

The Chair recognized Professor Weissbach who  moved to amend item 3 to read “Was this class given access to a syllabus during the first week of the course?’  The motion was seconded.

Discussion included Professors Hanchette and Busch. 

The chair put the question on the motion to amend, and the motion carried. 

Noting that the time stipulated for the Assembly had expired, the Chair asked if there was a motion to extend the Assembly.

Hearing no call to extend the Assembly, the Chair asked if there was a motion to adjourn.  Professor Riedel moved adjournment and the motion to adjourn was seconded.  The motion carried.


 
ATTACHMENT TO FACULTY ASSEMBLY MINUTES – 3/25/2011
Rationale and Proposed Criteria for Culminating Undergraduate Experience Courses in the College of Arts and Sciences
[Criteria as revised and approved by the A&S Faculty Assembly, 3/25/11]

Rationale: 
The Curriculum Committee was asked to create a set of criteria by which to evaluate courses proposed by departments to fulfill the University’s new requirement for a Culminating Undergraduate Experience in the major.  Our approach to this task was to create criteria that would be flexible enough for the wide range of disciplines in the College.
Designation  of the courses for the culminating experience is the responsibility of individual departments.  Departments may designate existing courses or propose new courses.  Once approved, the Curriculum Committee will post the criteria online in the form of a cover sheet for proposed courses.  Departments will be expected to use the cover sheet to describe how the proposed course or courses will meet the criteria and to provide the cover sheet and a course syllabus to the Curriculum Committee for approval.
Approved courses will be so designated (CUE) in the course title as it appears in the schedule of courses and on the student transcript, as is now done with WR courses.
Proposed Criteria for Culminating Undergraduate Experience Courses
The following criteria have been approved by the Arts and Sciences Curriculum Committee for courses to be designated as Culminating Undergraduate Experiences.
1. The course must be taken after sufficient academic preparation (for example, at least 90 credits of coursework or the completion of key prerequisite courses).
2. The course must be a credit-bearing course in the major. (Examples include, but are not limited to, 500-level courses involving a significant research project, capstone courses, fieldwork, honors thesis, laboratory research projects, service learning projects, and internships.)
3. The course must provide the opportunity for students to demonstrate a mastery of content in the major and to apply critical thinking skills to accumulated content and experience.
4. The course must address current issues, problems, or concerns relevant to the field or discipline.
5. The department must engage in ongoing evaluation and review of the course design. (Examples of review may include, but are not limited to, student evaluations, periodic departmental review, feedback from internship or practicum sites.)
6. The course must produce materials that can be assessed by internal or external reviewers using evaluation criteria relevant to the discipline. (Examples of such materials include, but are not limited to, papers, reports, portfolios, and performance.)