Undergraduate Education, Council on - Minutes - 2007-2008
CUE Minutes 4/4/08:
Faculty Senate Chambers
Members Present: J. Rust; J. Ambrose, J. Tector, A. Dupont, A. Joyner, R. Foy, D. Barlage, M. Chu, M. Shearer, A. Nowel, H. Kellner, T. Morant, C. Jordan, M. Atkinson, L. Williams, D. Howard, D. Aurbach, K. Lewis, B. Matthews, C. Levine, G. Weinberg, C. Freeman
Guests:
Dr. Larry Blanton, University Honors Program
Opened at 1:40 pm
Comments from the Chair: Welcome to the committee members.
Comments from Dean: There has been some concern on campus about the change that was made to the Additional Breadth rationale in that it has changed from the GER Task Force recommendation. The committee will have to come back and visit this issue and there will be guests attending the next meeting for this discussion.
Approval of minutes from 2-29-08. Seconded; discussion – none; approved unanimously.
Please note there are 2 more CUE meetings for this academic year.
Honors Courses – Moved to approve; seconded. Discussion: Dr. Larry Blanton presented the Honors Special Topics Courses (Spring 08 series). The Honors Experimental Special Topics courses were approved unanimously for their respective GER categories.
IP Symposium Update:
The IP Symposium was held on Wednesday, April 2, 2008, at the University Club. It was well attended and a good opportunity for faculty to discuss interdisciplinary courses and undergraduate education. Brian Matthews presented an update on the Symposium. Half a dozen faculty members produced posters for the session. Will Kimler was the keynote and started the Symposium off. There was also a group of panel members who gave quick intros to what they were doing in their own courses. Some of these panelists also had posters for viewing and discussion. Bill Winner led the group into a discussion of what the university needed in response to interdisciplinary courses. It was pointed out that the university is behind in regards to offering and having courses that are interdisciplinary. The audience then broke out into roundtables to discuss some of the questions organized to facilitate the discussion. Cynthia Levine presented some of the feedback that she recorded at her table’s discussion. Participating CUE members talked about their experiences at the roundtables and some of the ideas generated through this process.
- Video was made of the session and while not ready at this moment, will be available for viewing soon.
- Members asked about continuing the discussion through the rest of the semester, Many felt a fair amount of good work is stemming from these discussions. CUE members asked to also pick up the discussion back up in the fall. Members asked if there was discussion on a phased implementation of interdisciplinary courses.
- Have a first draft of the rationale and objectives for this category by the end of this semester to put up for discussion and review to begin the process.
- STS courses will be used as the first courses to populate this category, but these would be reviewed to see if they are still appropriate.
- Cynthia, Brian, Allen, David – volunteered to be on subcommittee for drafting rationale and objectives for the IP category.
- Subcommittee will report back in four weeks.
Criteria for GEP courses – Course Rubric:
- The committee members reviewed the rubric and the criteria used in the rubric for GER courses http://www.ncsu.edu/assessment/ger/pdf/GER_CUE_criteria12.pdf
- Dr. Ambrose gave a brief history of the current criteria used in the rubric including course availability to students and how this came about for approving courses to the GER.
- Committee members discussed how to revise or add to this rubric in regards to the new GEP program.
- Committee Review & Discussion of the Rubric:
- Departmental Criteria section: Departments should have certified the GER/GEP outcomes for their courses. This section is mostly for the departments and their definitions for their courses. Discussion continued at length on how courses, syllabi, and outcomes and objectives relate to one another and how they are used with courses on campus. Members discussed how the rubric is used to evaluate GER courses. Members had clarifications on objectives and outcomes and how they relate.
Revisions discussed by the committee members: Discussions continued at length and the below are the revised criteria as agreed upon by the committee:
Departmental criteria #1
1. Are the stated GEP course learning outcomes supported by the course content?
2. Are the stated GEP course learning outcomes applicable across all the course sections?
3. Does each stated GEP course learning outcome map to a GEP category objective?
4. (same) Are the means of evaluating these stated GEP course learning outcomes likely to provide the instructor with evidence that will enable him/her to improve student learning in the course?
5. Are the stated GEP student learning outcomes clearly measurable using the proposed means of evaluation?
Switch number 5 to number 4 and 4 to 5 for the ordering of the criteria.- Motion to approve the revised departmental criteria on the rubric. Seconded. Approved unanimously.
Basic Criteria: Course Availability: Criteria Discussion:
- add to number 6: if all the seats are restricted to a major or majors, justification is required.
Motion was made to extend the meeting 10 minutes: approved unanimously.
Fell below the quorum. Meeting ended at 3:00 pm.