General Education Committee Meeting (Minutes)
Attendees: Kathy Delker, Chair (KD), Amy Drassen Ham (ADH), Shirlene Small (SS), Kamran Rokhsaz (KR), Becky Nordyke (BN), Steve Oare (SO), Aaron Rife (AR), Shelby Rowell, Student Representative (SR) Gina Crabtree, Registrar’s Office (GC), Sally Fiscus, Registrar’s Office (SF), Rick Muma, Interim Provost (RM), George Dehner, Reporter (GD).
I. Approval of Minutes (KD)
II. CESP 334-Question from Registrar’s office
-GC-CESP 334 was accepted as a General Education at the last meeting (11/27/17). Education
is now seeking to allow their majors to take this course for Gen. Ed. credit. In the
past, we have adopted a very technical approach to this issue, if it’s from another
program we are generally allowing it as General Education credit. But we want to be
sure we are conforming to the spirit—not just the letter—of the law. CESP does not
have an undergraduate program so this course would be taught by Education faculty
to their majors.
-Summary of discussion:
-SO suggested that this is fundamentally the same course taught in Psychology. As a Psychology course this would not present a case of “double-counting” (counting one course as both a major requirement and a Gen Ed. requirement).
-AR stated his understanding from Education was that this was to help get the degree requirement under the KBOR recommended total of 120.
-RM pointed out that: one this formula for Education has already been presented to KBOR and denying this “double-dipping” would require reworking their 120 degree program; and two, this was stated as one of the goals in the CESP 334 application when presented to this committee.
-GD stated that this was not part of the discussion of CESP 334 which had revolved around explicitly demonstrating Gen. Ed. goals and clarifying whether the application was for Further Studies or Issues and Perspective credit.
GC and SF pointed out that the Registrar’s Office has been using the subject code part of a course number to determine whether or not a Gen Ed course is in the major. Using that approach, a CESP course is not in the CI major. They noted this works well in the liberal arts and sciences college, but that it becomes complicated in some of the other colleges like the College of Education.
-KD Made a motion to accept this course (CESP 334) as counting as a credit for both the Education major and as a Further Studies Gen. Ed. course. SO seconded, and KD called for discussion.
-GD Suggested that it is a bad practice for this committee to accept exceptions to the rules for courses especially since the Gen. Ed. program is likely to be re-evaluated by the Senate/Faculty in the near future. Nor does the fact that KBOR requests us to revamp our degree programs to 120 hours mean we have to immediately start making rules changes to meet this goal. It is reasonable to expect that revising degree programs requires time and discussion.
-Discussion was closed and the vote taken.
Motion to accept CESP 334 as a course that can count as General Education Further
Studies and as a major requirement for Education passed (5-3).
-RM commented that technically the motion was not required because the acceptance of CESP 334 as stated included this provision.
III. KD Discussed a memo from Faculty Senate President Carolyn Shaw informing her that the First Year Seminar Pilot Project will need consideration from the committee as to whether it will recommend acceptance of the Seminar requirement for all incoming freshmen. The proposal as specifically stated says “to allow one more academic year 2018-19 to pilot the FYS courses, with the course becoming a curricular requirement for all incoming Freshmen in 2019-20 academic year.” [See attached memorandum].
-RM provided an overview of the FYS program’s evolution from WSU 101 to pilot program
and suggested that the earliest date he could get survey and retention information
for the committee would be 2/19/18.
-BN recounted her positive experiences teaching the course.
-AR has experience teaching the course as well.
-RM confirmed that 25 sections of 25 students max are planned for the Fall and Spring of 2019/2020.
IV. KD recommended tabling the rewording of Gen. Ed. committee responsibilities for a future meeting as this is not a pressing matter.
-KD she also requested some information about RM’s role and future status for the
committee with the new responsibilities he holds as Interim Provost.
-RM recounted his history with the committee which was restarted with him as coordinator after previous provost Gary Miller had shut it down. His role is to support the committee and he is currently searching for someone to fill this role going forward.
V. KD called for a motion to adjourn.
Meeting adjourned at 1:52
From: Shaw, Carolyn
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 11:14 AM
To: Delker, Kathy
Cc: Muma, Richard
Subject: Gen Ed committee > FYS recommendation
I wanted to follow up with you regarding a Gen Ed committee agenda item: Consideration of whether the First Year Seminar pilot project should become a permanent part of the gen ed curriculum. I recognize that this is a little tricky knowing that your committee has recommended that the Gen Ed program be reviewed and potentially revised in the near future, but I think the recommendation should be made based on the status quo, and that the Ad Hoc Review committee will simply have to make their future revisions to Gen Ed taking into account the Gen Ed Committee’s recommendation on this matter.
The proposal is specifically to allow one more academic year 2018-19 to pilot the FYS courses, with the course becoming a curricular requirement for all incoming Freshmen in 2019-20 academic year. This would give faculty time to further develop these courses, as well as getting them approved through the Gen Ed committee in the Fall 2018 semester (for Fall 2019 schedule building that starts in Spring 2019).
I am currently waiting for the Fall 2017 survey data to be reported. As soon as I get it, I will forward it to the committee for consideration (along with the previous survey and retention data from last year). I’ve asked for it no later than March 5, so it can be reviewed at your March 12 meeting. The Senate must have a recommendation from your committee by March 30 in order for a positive recommendation to make it through the Senate by the end of the semester.
Just wanted to give you this heads up as you work on your Spring committee agenda. Let me know if you have any questions at this point.
Dr. Carolyn Shaw
Professor and Chair
Faculty Senate President
Political Science Department
Wichita State University
Wichita KS 67260-0017