Search
Southern Home PageAbout Southern Connecticut State UniversityAcademicsAdmissionsStudent LifeResearchAthleticsHuman Resources at Southern
Southern Connecticut State University LibraryMySCSUSouthern DirectoryCalendar of EventsTechnologyContact Us
Department Banner
 

Undergraduate Curriculum Forum (UCF)

Minutes 11/10/05

Present 

B. Phelan, R. Vaters-Carr, J. Feng, G. Kowalczyk, D. Weiss, R. Glinka, S. DiFrancesco, H. Podnar, A. Abugri, B. Achhpal, N. Marano, N. Henderson, C. Coron, D. Marino, E. Schmidt, E. West,  N. Chrissidis, N. Disbrow, J. Fields, K. Burke, C. Dellinger-Pate, J. Goralski,  M. Moss, M. Vancour, K. Gatzke, R. Hunter, M. Kiarie, J. Tait, W. O'Brien, W. Shyam,  J. Mielczarski, K. Laing, M. Kurowski, M. Heidmann, K. Mauro, T. Lin

I.          Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 9:40 a.m. 

II.        Announcements

Karen Burke announced that next Wednesday, 11/16, the Media Studies Club is holding a fun-raising event.  

III. Chair's Report

The chair announced the following:

  • He had a recent meeting with the provost and continued to lobby for a full-time University Assistant for UCF.
  • In a recent meeting with John Mattia, who is in charge of the catalogue, the discussion focused on how the catalogue might evolve in the future, including the possibility of getting rid of the hard-copy and making it completely electronic.

IV.       Approval of Minutes of 10/27/05

The minutes from 10/27/05 were approved, with one abstention, pending corrections, including making the roster accurate and correcting some spelling mistakes.

V.        Approval of standing committee minutes of 10/20/05

Notifications Management(NMC)

NMC minutes of 11/3/05 were accepted.

The following motions were presented and approved with one abstention:

  • Revised course PSC 338 be approved
  • New course EDU 322 be approved
  • Revised program proposal for EDU Undergraduate Early Childhood be approved
  • Revised course ED 309 be approved
  • New course ANT 490 be approved
  • New course MDS 150 be approved

New Programs and Innovations (NPIC)

NPIC minutes from 11/3/05 were accepted.

NPIC logged the following New Special Topics courses:

  • HIS 298: Popular Culture in China
  • PSY 298: Life Span Development

Program Review and Assessment (PRAC)

PRAC minutes from 11/3/05 were accepted.

PRAC had a discussion about the differences between course outlines and syllabi, noting that course outlines do not change over time and should contain learning outcomes.  They would like to see the general body of the UCF pick up this discussion at some point.

Writing Across the Curriculum (WACC)

WACC minutes of 11/3/05 were accepted.

WACC announced that they're still in a wide-ranging discussion about how to implement the "W" courses.

The chair of UCF announced that WACC now has a budget to hire a University Assistant.  He suggested WACC begin discussing this at the next meeting.

University-Wide Impact Committee (UWIC)

No report

VI.       Discussion with Deans concerning the role of the School Curriculum Committees

Deans or their representatives from the different schools were present for the discussion of the role of the School Curriculum Committees (SCC), including Jim Granfield, Dean of Education, Ed Harris, Dean of Communication Information and Library Science  George Appleby, Dean of Health and Human Services, and Thuan Vu, Chair of the Arts and Sciences SCC, representing Dean Fredeen, Dean of Arts and Sciences.

The chair of UCF explained that confusion over the role of the SCCs became an issue when a proposal from history was sent back to the department by the Arts and Sciences SCC, who asked that learning outcomes be added to the proposal.  The faculty member who had proposed the course objected because UCF has no standards stating that "learning outcomes" must be included.  Nikos Chrissidis, UCF member who is also the chair of History's Department Curriculum Committee (DCC) clarified that the member did have learning objectives, which met the UCF standards, and that the DCC supported this member's decision to use learning objectives rather than learning outcomes. 

The question raised by this situation is as follows:  Are the SCCs subservient to the UCF or do they act on behalf of the Deans to maintain standards, and particularly higher standards, as specific to certain schools?

Some members offered a history of the formation of the SCCs.  It was pointed out that the SCCs and the UCF were created at the same time, but approved by separate faculty referendums.  The intent of the original proposal to form the SCCs, according to the memory of some members, was that the SCCs would help expedite the process by doing the bulk of the work in terms of reviewing the proposals, but that they would do so using the UCF standards.   In fact, it was noted, the UCF subcommittee, Notifications Management, was so named because it was intended to be mostly a notification body, while the SCC was intended to provide the bulk of the review.  It was also remembered that the UCF proposed the SCCs, but the SCCs were created by the schools on a voluntary basis.

A concern was raised that if the SCCs can set their own standards, then they elevate their status above that of the UCF.

Dean Granfield said that as he understood it, the intent of the original proposal also included the notion that the SCCs would be able to put their own mark on the standards.  Although they could not lower standards below those of the UCF, he believed the SCCs did have the right to raise the standards, above those of the UCF, as necessary for the specific needs of the different schools.   The chair of UCF said that his discussion with Dean Fredeen indicated she supported this position.

It was pointed out that one instance in which a SCC might have its own standards was when it was dealing with an accreditation body.  Some members felt the SCC should regulate this, while others felt that that was the role of the DCC.  Dean Harris agreed that the departments are the ones most aware of the specific mandates imposed on them, and they should be the one to deal with these standards at the DCC level.

A question as to why the SCCs even existed, if the Deans were comfortable with the roles of the DCCs in the approval process, was raised.  It was suggested to do away with the SCCs and trust the departments to do that work, which would cut out additional weeks of back-and-forth of proposals.

Reading from UCF document, "Flow of Proposals," a member pointed out that the SCCs, Notifications Management, and the UCF are expected to be routine and expedient.  This, he said, suggests that the SCC is not necessarily a body that should be raising standards.  The burden falls on the DCCs to do the bulk of the review of proposals, making sure specific needs are met.

It became evident that one of the problems causing confusion over the role of the SCC is that they have no written, published, and distributed set of standards.  Members suggested that it might be possible for the SCC to set their own standards if those standards were approved by a faculty referendum (of faculty in said School), and if those standards were clearly documented and distributed. 

Other members, however, continued to question whether the SCCs should have that power at all, even with faculty vote and documentation. 

A motion was proposed by Joe Manzella:

"The SCCs abide by the forms and standards already set in place by the UCF, without raising or lowering those standards, as outlined in the UCF guidelines."

The motion was seconded.

Discussion of this motion took place, leading eventually to a friendly amendment by Karen Burke, which was accepted, turning the motion into the following:

"The SCCs abide by the forms and standards already set in place by the UCF, without raising or lowering those standards, as outlined in the UCF guidelines, unless the school has clear written, published, and distributed guidelines that have been approved by the faculty within that school or are governed by outside accreditation bodies"

It was noted that perhaps something should be added to indicate that the SCC has the right to raise the standards, but not lower them.  A member wondered, if we approve this motion, can the UCF still override the SCC? 

The question was called.  Members objected to calling the question.

It was suggested that, since we were running out of time, the proposal be sent to the steering committee to be fleshed-out and for the language to be cleaned up. 

A substitute motion was proposed, seconded and approved with one abstention:

 

  • The motion on the table will be referred to the Steering Committee to clean up the language and flesh it out. 

The chair of the UCF agreed the revised motion would be brought back to the UCF at the next meeting.

VII.     Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 a.m.

Minutes recorded by Nicole Henderson, Secretary for UCF