Draft General Education Committee Minutes

February 7, 2005

327 Graff Main Hall

 

Members Present:  Sandy Grunwald, Jess Hollenback, Emily Johnson (Chair), Eric Kraemer, Cris Prucha, Bruce Riley, Brian Udermann, Mike Winfrey

Members Excused: Mary Leonard Anderson

Consultants Present: Chris Bakkum, Terry Beck, Keith Beyer, Bruce May, Diane Schumacher

Guests Present:  Katie Lindemann

 

I.        M/S/P to approve the minutes of 1/31/05.

II.     Old Business

A.      Assessment

·        Sandy distributed and discussed the Analysis of Global Perspective Assessment.  No significant correlation was found between age group or number of courses and the global perspective score.  However, a significant difference in average score was found between students who had an “other experience” and further analysis will be done to look at the explanations of “other experience”. 

·        Dave Reineke will continue to work with Gen Ed assessment in spring.  Sandy will look into what a standard rate for use of the Consulting Center might be and will discuss at next meeting.

·        Sandy distributed an updated list of volunteer classrooms.  There are still a few sessions that Gen Ed will need to administer.  Sandy will send a reminder email to the committee with those times.

B.     Emily met with the deans last week about the Faculty Senate Forum and they felt it would be helpful to provide a picture of what outcomes were frequently mentioned and the “hits”, but thought including the questions might inhibit participants from generating their own thoughts.  The intention is to remain focused on the mission statement and course review information, and Emily encouraged as many GEC members to be there as possible.  Concerns/comments mentioned by members about the forum were:

·        Disappointment that the questions won’t be included

·        Concern that the whole meeting will be about course reviews (which is just one portion of what the GEC has done over the past 5 years).

·        Importance of re-emphasizing that we didn’t ask for all three levels of outcomes, so outcomes not listed may be of lower priority/emphasis rather than missing.

C.     Emily distributed the Spring Semester Goals and Timeline and asked for comments, concerns, and feedback.  After extensive discussion about specific activities, it was generally concluded that it is a priority for the committee to put a report with recommendations before FS by the end of this year so that it can be one of the first items discussed in the fall.  Emily will juggle some of the timeline’s dates around to make them better correspond with one another and the committee will move forward with the listed goals and see what happens.  Some specific comments/concerns/feedback were:

·        There was not a big response to last spring’s Writing Emphasis assessment.   Emily would like to see it done again and at least have it go out by 4/18.

·        If we’re serious about going forward with FYE, we need to have a task force, and a recommendation was made to make sure that the charge of this task force is clear and understood.

D.     More course reviews have been coming in but the changes will not be made to the FS website before the Thursday’s forum.  The question was raised as to whether faculty will be asked to do outcomes again when doing recertification.  It is likely that they would, and we would ask for a more complete list of outcomes addressed, not just those at level 3.

 

III.   New Business

A.     After considerable discussion about timing, it was determined that the deadline for the Second Call for Proposals will be moved from March 31st to April 1st.  Emily will send an early interest email to faculty notifying them that the GEC will be putting out a call for proposals with a specific list of what should be included in FYE, indication that a stipend is available, and the due date for the proposals.  Decisions will be made at the April 18th meeting.

B.     Emily raised the question of whether or not further faculty development should be offered this semester.  It was determined that this might be more appropriate and feasible during summer as this semester is already quite full.

 

IV.  Subcommittee Reports

A.     Ad Hoc on Learning Outcomes is waiting for the completed grid from Emily and for streamlined lists from its members.  They will be meeting on Monday, February 14.

B.     Structure will hopefully be meeting later this week.

C.     FYE had no report, but lead to sorting out of who is on which subcommittee:

·        Structure – Brian Udermann, Mike Winfrey, Diane Schumacher, Erik Kraemer, Chris Bakkum

·        Assessment – Bruce Riley, Sandy Grunwald, Terry Beck

·        FYE – Cris Prucha, Jess Hollenback, Mary Leonard-Anderson

·        Emily will serve on all.

 

V.     Announcements

A.     Diane is the GE representative on the Teacher Education Governing Council and she announced that there is a new and advanced PRAXIS II test that will have to be taken in order for new teachers to be eligible for teacher certification.  The test is content-based and includes general science knowledge.  Adding the test underscores the importance of Gen Ed.

B.     Mike is interested in going to the SENCER (Science Education for New Civic Engagements and Responsibilities) Conference in early August and will be looking for people to form a team to include 2 people from science, 1 from humanities, 1 from education, and 1 administrator.

C.     Brian commented that depending on the recommendations made in spring and the charges from FS in fall, he thinks it is important that the GEC focus in on only those things and work really hard to achieve them.  This might mean cutting back discussion on other issues to accomplish the goals we set. 

 

Meeting Adjourned at 5:30pm.

 

Next Meeting:

Monday, February 21, 2005 (Second read: Health WIMP; First reads; Physic course changes likely)

Monday, March 7, 2005 (Second reads)

Monday, March 21, 2005