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 Committee

Notification Management Committee Minutes  
October 4, 2001  (amended 10-11-01)


Present: Jon Bloch (chair), Kathy Mauro, Vince Breslin, Beena Achhpal, Dan Soneson, Joe Fields, George Puerschner, Noreen DeCrosta, Lisa Rebeschi, Bonnie Farley-Lucas
Recorder: Beena Achhpal

 

CSC 306: George made the motion to accept, and Kathy Mauro seconded it.
Motion approved 10-0-0


CSC 307: George made the motion to accept, and Dan seconded it.
Motion approved 10-0-0


FLA 332: George made the motion to accept and Cathy seconded it.
Motion approved 10-0-0

 
Program Revisions/CPR forms: A discussion ensued as to whether programs should be able to require their majors to take a specific course to fulfill an AUR, and how this issue might impact the NMC.
We "brainstormed" arguments pro and con:


Pro

1. The required course is still in the list of AURs.
2. Making this change in a program requires a rationale submitted to the DCC, SCC, and UCF, any of which could reject it if unconvinced.
3. Necessary for some programs.
4. There are already limits placed on which courses count as AURs (some of which haven't been offered in years), and there are hidden prerequisites, required math/English courses, etc., anyway; i.e., there already are limitations placed on a student's academic "freedom," which issue is therefore something of a fallacy.
5. Student has already picked a general focus of study, and so expects/prefers to keep courses within this range of inquiry.
6. Signifies departmental autonomy to decide these matters for itself.
7. Alternatives such as making the AUR a cognate might take up too much room in a student's schedule, and make things more difficult for the students.


Con

1. Limits breadth and range of course exposure for student.
2. Gives student too narrow an overall focus, i.e., "trade school" vs. liberal arts mentality.
3. In the final analysis, an AUR is not part of the student's major, and should not be treated as such.
4. The AUR is not intended to provide mastery, but an overview; therefore, how "essential" one is for a major might often be overrated.
5. If the student has no choice for a given AUR, scheduling, etc. might be problematic.
6. Perhaps programs need to think more in terms of "recommended" AURs as opposed to stating that one is literally required.