Undergraduate Curriculum Forum (UCF)
Minutes 4/14/05
Present
R. Vaters-Carr, J. Feng, G. Kowalczyk, G. DeJarnette, R. Glinka, H. Podnar, A. Abugri, N. Marano, N. Henderson, N. Chrissidis, W. Shyam, J. Fields, R. Mugno, R. Kustin, K. Gatzke, K. Buterbaugh, K. Marsland, R. Hunter, S. Jackson, W. O'Brien, C. Barrett, J. Mielczarski, K. Laing, L. Kohrn, M. Heidmann, K. Mauro, T. Lin, B. Achhpal, S. DiFrancesco, S. Bochain, J. Tait, M. Shea, L. Yacher, D. Marino
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 9:40 a.m.
II. Announcements
Jim Tait announced that the Gen Ed reform ballots have been distributed, and reminded us that the UCF, in a recent vote, imposed a quorum standard higher than any other for a gen ed change; therefore, we should be sure to vote.
Mark Heidmann told us that the first issue of The Write Stuff, a newsletter from the Writing Support Committee has been distributed and that a second issue will follow. He reminded us that they are still seeking tips, ideas, and suggestions for teaching with writing in the classroom.
The chair announced that a replacement for Christine Stanton has been hired and is expected to begin work next Friday.
III. Approval of UCF Minutes of 3/31/05
The UCF minutes of 3/31/05 were approved with one abstention pending minor formatting and spelling edits.
IV. Reception of Standing Committee Minutes and Approval of Standing Committee Motions
Steering Committee
No report.
Notifications Management (NMC)
NMC Minutes of 4/7/05 received.
Concern over the point at which a revised course proposal actually becomes a new course proposal (in terms of the amount and nature of the revisions) was expressed and debated. This issue was, at some point, linked to the pending motion of Revised course COM 200, as described in the NMC minutes. Sandy DiFrancesco from the Communications department agreed that there should be a discussion in NMC over the point at which a revised course proposal actually becomes a new course proposal. However, she said we should not be discussing this point in reference to COM 200, or any course, brought before the entire UCF because the members do not have the detailed information provided to NMC concerning the proposal. She said that this is not the first time a COM course was discussed in this manner by the UCF body with no knowledge of the information provided on the proposal.
Nicole Henderson asked for clarification about procedure, noting that the NMC decisions to pass certain courses were not unanimous. She wondered if, in cases like this, the dissenters would be free to bring their concerns to the UCF body. It was clarified that they certainly could bring those concerns forward, but if they remained silent at the UCF meeting, we would have to assume they were in agreement with the decision.
Motions:
· Revised course COM 200: Fundamentals of Communication Design be approved
· Revised course COM 201: Applied Communication Design be approved
· Revised course COM 234: Fundamentals of Copywriting be approved
· Revised course COM 335: Advertising and Promotional Design be approved
· New course COM 236: Copywriting for Electronic Media be approved
Motions approved
In favor 20 ~ Opposed 0 ~ Abstentions 6
New Programs and Innovations (NPIC)
NPIC Minutes of 4/7/05 were received.
Program Review and Assessment (PRAC)
PRAC minutes of 4/7/05 were received.
PRAC plans to deliver three assessment workshops for the Spring 2005 semester.
University-Wide Impact Committee (UWIC)
No report.
Writing Across the Curriculum (WACC)
WACC minutes of 4/7/05 were received.
WACC discussed their plans to create a spreadsheet organizing the complex information about L-course and instructor approval from each department. They also discussed the difficulties with designating L-courses as W-courses, as related to Banner issues.
Motion: Dr. Jeanette Opdisano's proposal for MGT 403L and WMS 403L: Women's Multidisciplinary Entrepreneurship be accepted as an "L" course offering.
Motion approved with one abstention.
Motion: The "L" course designation remain as presently used, to identify writing intensive courses on the SCSU transcript.
Members expressed concern with this motion, and discussion ensued. Lynn Kohrn explained that neither "L" nor "W" actually appear on the transcript; rather, an asterisk appears. Mark Heidmann was concerned the motion did not take into account other issues previously discussed at length, and presented a motion to return the motion in question to WACC for further consideration until at least three related issues could be discussed further. Kevin Buterbaugh suggested simply voting down the motion to return the motion, as well the original motion. Mark Heidmann was worried that this would put us on record as against the motion itself, which wasn't necessarily so.
Motion: To return the above motion to WACC for further discussion.
Motion approved.
In favor 20 ~ Opposed 3 ~ Abstentions 3
V. Discussion of Senate resolution on "Assessment of Student Learning"
The chair asked for a sense of the UCF body on the Senate resolution, which calls for "...a moratorium on assessment directives in order to facilitate a participatory and critical dialogue with faculty..." Members expressed concern about the document, worrying that the language seems to call for a moratorium on all assessment, which could interfere with the curricular choices of individual faculty members as well as departmental decisions regarding assessment. Mark Heidmann said he would rather see the document as a Senate report, rather than a resolution. He worried that the use of the word "assessment" has narrowed the conceptual possibilities for it, and he felt that the Senate resolution was directed at a very narrowed definition of "assessment." The chair pointed out that there is an important distinction to be made between departmental and student assessment, which he wasn't sure the document made clear. Shirley Jackson pointed this to the use of the word "directives" in the document and expressed concern that the document wasn't clear about from where and whom those directives were coming. Mike Shea pointed out that the issues are complicated, particularly for those in the liberal arts, and that much more communication about the ways in which practices like "outcomes assessment" translates to these disciplines is needed.
Nikos Chrissidis said that clarity is necessary in relation to his work evaluating course proposals. In other words, what is he, as a member of UCF, supposed to expect on the proposals in terms of "learning outcomes?"
Nicole Henderson said that although she supports the concerns raised about the vagueness of the document, there are important issues about "academic freedom" in the resolution that should concern us as well. She pointed out that even if a department adopts particular assessment strategies and "embraces them", as some members had said about their own departments, this does not mean all faculty members in the department are in agreement about those strategies. In these cases, faculty members in the minority would be in the position of having to meet assessment "directives" from a force that, although, within the department, would seem "external." Kate Marsland also expressed concern about being lulled toward these external directives, moving us away from being able to engage in assessment practices appropriate to our disciplines, as well as our individual courses.
It was agreed that the sense of the UCF body on the Senate resolution is as follows:
We share some of the concerns of the resolution; however, the language of the document needs to be clearer in order for us to fully understand its meaning, particularly in relation to its claim for "SCSU to observe a moratorium on assessment directives..."
VI. Adjournment
Meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.
Minutes recorded by Nicole Henderson, Secretary for UCF
