Draft of Minutes for General Education Meeting

March 10, 2008

325 GMH


Members: Current, Fields, Galbraith, E. Kahl, Kraemer, Loh, Sloan, Pribek, Prucha, Ragan

Consultants: Burckhardt, Clow, Dittman, S. Knudson, Morgan


Call to Order:  The meeting was called to order by Chair Galbraith at 3:38 pm.


Minutes: Minutes from the last meeting will be considered at the next committee meeting.


Discussion: “What constitutes a General Education Course?”

After looking at the existing mission statement for General Education for guidance, the committee discussed guidelines for those interested in proposing General Education courses.  Discussion centered around three different items: [1] [sufficient] breadth of content, [2] having either no prerequisites or only Gen Ed prerequisites, and [3] being open to all students. 

Other questions raised in connection with this discussion included: Should there be minimum # of SLO’s for any course proposed as a Gen Ed course?  Should there be a special set of courses for those in special programs, such as Teacher Education, which have a large number of required credits? Comments were made both in favor and in opposition to creating special programs within General Education to satisfy a particular population of students.

Additional concerns included department using general education as a way of enabling double-dipping for their majors, and departments proposing courses in a variety of different categories within the General Education program. 


M/S/P  that the General Education committee draft a short general document of guidelines that informs proposers of courses for inclusion on General Education of the General Education mission statement, with an equal number of Do’s and Don’ts to guide those are interested in proposing courses for inclusion in the General Education program.


As the committee seemed to reach consensus regarding Do’s, the committee then briefly considered Don’ts.  Suggestions included [1] using upper-level or specialized courses that students are already taking in the major or minor also to count as General Education courses; [2] a department’s submitting a course in a category different from that in which a department already has courses; [3] submitting slash courses; and [4] submitting courses with non-General Education course prerequisites.

            Ragan agreed to write a draft of this document, which will then circulate electronically to members of the General Education committee for comment.


Discussion: Salvage Proposal

M/S to consider Field’s proposal to salvage the core proposal. 

Fields circulated a revised version of his proposal.  Concern was expressed about the guideline for taking all Tier 1 courses: it was suggested that 60 credits would work, and that 45 credits might not; but, it was recognized that 45 credits provided a more credible limit.  While some expressed concern that the committee was floundering in its discussions of program revision, others claimed that the committee was clearly working within the current plan.  Concerns were expressed about the suggestion that the General Education Committee would not be responsible for determining the number of credits in the program.  Concerns were expressed about moving forward to propose an FYE given the current committee information about the development of suggested FYE courses.  It was suggested that the committee might regard Field’s proposal as a working document as opposed to taking it as a proposal to submit to Faculty Senate or killing the proposal outright. 

W: The motion’s proposer withdrew the motion pending receipt of report on FYE courses; the seconder agreed. 

The chair announced that she will send an e-mail to faculty reporting on committee work and floating suggestions regarding the Field’s proposal, asking for information about a 45 credit limit for Tier 1 courses.


Adjournment:  The meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.


Respectfully submitted by

Eric Kraemer