Meeting of the Faculty Senate

                   General Education Committee

                          325 Main Hall

                          April 5, 2010

  

Meeting convened at 3:35pm, Galbraith presiding

 

Present: Michael Current, Anne Galbraith, Tom Gendreau, Gerald

Iguchi, Riley Moore, James Pierce, Tom Pribek, Bob Ragan, Don

Sloan

 

Excused: Jean Hindson

 

Guests & Consultants: Troy Richter, Amelia Dittman, Kathleen Enz Finken

 

M/S/P, with clarification for describing students' options for GE  

 composition requirement:

· Starting this fall for new students, a minimum grade of “C” is required in ENG 110 (or 112 for those who take that) to satisfy the Literacy requirement.  (this is a change from the BC grade previously required).  Further, there is no composition requirement beyond ENG 110 or 112. 

· Students no longer earn credit for ENG 110 with scores of 3 and 4 on the AP English test.

 

Kathleen Enz Finken, to comment on Higher Learning Commission

 evaluation of GE, & GEC discussion

 - HLC apparently wants evidence of change in response to assessment,

  perhaps similarity to more common "scaffolded" program; ass. we have

  now is limited to an SLO

 - GEC process: next, verify SLOs all covered by assessment

 - our new assessment person beginning work soon, can consult

  with GEC on addressing HLC concerns

 - could we add something broader than a course SLO, like "our

  six main goals"?

 - GEC maybe half-way through a review of "program itself"

   (HLC document)

   1. Major work of several years was SLO

   2. Now, collecting data on courses that are supposed to

    deliver SLOs

   3. Query: Do we match targets/goals to process?  And If we

    address everything, what do we do with that finding?

   4. Is revision needed for targets/intentions, the breadth of

    program goals, or implementation?

 - we need a justification of the essential quality of GE at UWL:

  lots of credits, with very liberal student choice

 - GE is cost effective & funds major programs; any change could

  double or triple cost, and resources just aren't going to follow

  any change

 - can we attribute success (applications, retention,

  employment) to GE?

 - must demonstrate that we/re changing for improvement, that

  we're not standing still; we have "nothing numerical" for that

 

Meeting adjourned at 4:42pm

Notes compiled by Pribek