Monday, April 16, 2007
325 Graff Main Hall
Members Present: Johnson, Kraemer, McDougal, Miller, Prucha, Ragan, Riley, Udermann, Bakke, Fields
Members excused: Ritterling
Consultants Present: Dittman, Morgan, Burkhardt, Richter, Bakkum
Guests Present: G. Cravins, D. Sullivan, J. Hollenbeck
I. Course Proposal: Maps and Society
A. G. Chu shared the new proposal and learning outcomes with GEC. The assessment and focus of the course has changed. It will now be a 3 credit course and the name changed to “Maps and Society”.
B. Concern that there are too many outcomes and the assessment piece is going to be quite detailed. It was suggested that the learning outcomes be combined or deleted so that there can be a focus on key learning outcomes. This would assist in streamlining the course structure.
C. Motion to approve course proposal – Udermann/S – McDougal/ P - unanimously
II. Motion to approve minutes from April 9, 2007 –Udermann/S – Riley/ P- unanimously
1. Faculty Senate approved the timeline. There was a concern about using the CLA but it was supported.
2. Attending HLC conference. The AGLS guide for Review and Assessment will be presented at the conference.
1. No report
1. No report
IV. Core I Recommendation
A. Review of previous discussion
1. Motion to move forward with Core I
2. Reviewed the number of courses in the first 30 credit hours
3. Reviewed the number of courses in the second 30 credit hours
4. Discussion about resources, departmental accommodation and budgets.
5. This motion would allow for the FYE to be piloted.
6. Concern with UW-L 100 only being offered to undeclared students could be seen as “punishment”. The FYE committee reminded GEC that this would be a pilot and there would be flexibility in the course structure and focus.
7. Could more UW-L 100 courses be funded?
8. Could UW-L 100 be filled to capacity and then more sections open as needed?
9. Discussion about the need to have UW-L 100 and CST and HPR be in the first 30 credits hours. Would there be overlap in the courses and what budget constraints would there be?
B. Motion to reconsider previous FYE motion – Udermann/ S – Ragan
1. Motion passed: Y – Ragan, Riley, Miller, Udermann, Kraemer
N – McDougal, Prucha, Johnson
1. Concern about learning outcomes
2. Revisited last weeks discussion
3. The possibility of having a control group of students was raised
3. Motion to amend previous motion by changing 2 to 1 (item b) and to illuminate #2 on line 15. The motion would now read as 1 FYE course taken in the 1st 30 credit hours
1. Vote on the amendment:
a. Y- Bakke, Ragan, Riley, Miller, Udermann, Kraemer
b. N – Prucha, Johnson, McDougal
c. A - Fields
2. Motion to accept the amended amendment
a. Y – Ragan, Riley, Miller, Kraemer, Udermann, Bakke
b. N – Fields, Johnson, Prucha, McDougal
c. Motion passed
3. Motion to accept the new FYE proposal
a. Y – Miller, Ragan, Riley, Bakke, Udermann, Kraemer
b. N – Johnson, Prucha, McDougal
c. A – Fields
d. Motion passed
V. Rest of the agenda would be discussed at the next meeting
VI. M/S/P to adjourn (5:30p.m.). Next meeting will be April 30, 2007 at 3:30pm in 325 Main Hall