University of Minnesota, Morris
Morris, Minnesota

October 14, 1997; 8:00 a.m.; Behmler Conference Room

Present: Asmus, Ballou, Ellis, Farrell, Kissock, Korth, Leroux, McIntosh, Schuman, Taylor, Thielke

Absent: Davis, Frenier, Lee, Nylander

[In these minutes: blanket approval of minutes, meeting time for the quarter, adjunct committee continuation, two semester course proposals, gathering general education categories and enrollment projections for each semester course]

Mooney distributed copies of Academic Support Services Committee materials, including the April 17, 1997 minutes and the 1996-97 annual report. Also attached was the 9/26/97 memo from Schuman requesting a recommendation about continuation from each of the adjunct committees of the Curriculum Committee (CC).

Schuman opened the meeting by having CC members introduce themselves. He then explained that the CC has a tradition of approving a motion for blanket approval of minutes in order to save committee time.

MOTION (Understood): To give blanket approval of minutes as mailed unless corrections are made before or during the meeting following distribution.

VOTE: Unanimous in favor (8-0-0).

Schuman said that members' schedules indicate two open meeting times this quarter--Tuesdays or Wednesdays at 8:00 a.m. CC members agreed to meet regularly on Tuesdays at 8:00 a.m. Schuman asked Mooney to get a schedule of meetings out to members as soon as possible. [Later: CC meetings are scheduled for:

Tuesday, October 28, 8:00 a.m., Behmler Conference Room
Tuesday, November 11, 8:00 a.m., Behmler Conference Room
Tuesday, November 25, 8:00 a.m., Behmler Conference Room]

Schuman noted that item #4 on the agenda, continuation of adjunct committees, will probably be the biggest issue for the CC this quarter. The adjunct committees of the CC are:

Last year the Executive Committee requested that the five major Assembly committees (of which the CC is one) examine with their adjunct committees whether the adjuncts should continue to exist. Last year the CC was extremely busy reviewing the new semester curriculum, so put off this task until this year. Now the CC needs to decide whether to recommend continuation for each of its adjunct committees. Schuman said he had written a memo to the chairs of the adjunct committees (see the last sheet of the handout) asking for their recommendations about continuation. The deadline for the report is October 24.

Schuman said that one committee--the ASSC--has already responded. That committee's recommendation to continue was distributed at the beginning of the meeting. Schuman's plan would be to wait until we get responses from all of the adjunct committee chairs. We may want to invite the chairs to a CC meeting, depending upon their responses. So far, all of the adjunct committees across campus which have already responded have asked to be continued.

Schuman asked for comments from CC members. Ballou said she had some questions for the chair of the ASSC and thought it was a good idea to have the chairs come to a CC meeting. Schuman wondered if the CC wanted the chairs invited to a CC meeting now. The response was affirmative; two chairs should be invited to each meeting.

Korth commented that one of the problems with the committee system at UMM is that campus community members who are not on the committee don't know what is going on in those committees. One of the goals for the committee should be communication about what they are doing. Farrell wondered why committees no longer send out minutes. Every committee should forward their minutes. Schuman said the CC might want to make some recommendation to the Executive Committee. We could request that adjunct committees send out a list of items being discussed rather than minutes. In the T.C., they list at the top of the minutes the topics being discussed at that meeting. Let's keep this in mind. Schuman thought it would be good to reduce the number of people on each committee rather than the number of committees.

Schuman said there were two course proposals to be considered at this meeting. He noted that new CC members will quickly become familiar with the course proposal forms being used by the Curriculum Committee.

IS 3010 Conversion to Semesters--
Schuman referred CC members to the proposal from University College (UC) for conversion of IS 3010, ELTAP, from quarters to semesters.

McIntosh wondered what it meant that the course was a "University College" course. Kissock said UC courses are approved by the college but implemented by University College (formerly known as Continuing Education). Schuman noted that this UC course is an IS course with ties to the Division of Education. It is administratively more convenient to teach these courses through UC in terms of hiring faculty, administration, finances, etc.

Leroux asked why the course is being proposed at 12 credits. Kissock said the conversion would normally be 2/3 and go from 15 quarter credits to 10 semester credits. There were two issues with the conversion of this course--one was number of credits and the other the number of weeks. The line on the proposal form "assignment for one quarter" should say "assignment for 11 weeks." Students need a course for 12 credits in order to qualify for federal financial aid. In terms of the length of the course, 11 weeks is sufficient for the educational benefits to be gained from the program. From the viewpoint of the host family and school, 10-11 weeks is long enough. These were fundamental issues regarding the length of the stay. This is a flexible program because of the various times of the year when schools are in session.

Leroux asked if there are 12 credits of work in the course. Kissock said the feeling of faculty involved in the program is that there are. There are two papers required of students. Schuman wondered how much time students spend in the classroom. Kissock said it varies. The premise is that there will be 20 hours in the classroom per week. There are 5 hours of school each day for a total of 25 hours per week. We insist that not more than 20 hours of the ELTAP student's time be used each week in order to protect students from being overused by the school system. In Brazil, a first-time program did not use the students that much, but in Italy, there is a student working in the school during the day and in homes at night (but the student chose to do that).

Farrell said he would agree with Kissock's description. He has been in Lithuania and Cameroon where he discovered that students work very hard, not only academically, but also talking with families. He has no objection to the credit level.

Kissock noted that there have been 112 students and 10 UMM faculty involved in the program so far. Most of the students have been from UMM, but some have been from the T.C. and Duluth.

MOTION (Understood): To approve the proposal to convert IS 3010, English Language Teaching Assistant Program, to semesters.

VOTE: Unanimous in favor (8-0-0).

IS 1091, Ethical and Social Implications of Technology
Schuman said the other course proposal is for a new course in semesters, IS 1091, Ethical and Social Implications of Technology. This course, proposed by the computer science discipline, is clearly designed to meet the new general education requirement "Ethical and Civic Responsibility."

Leroux wondered how many 2-credit courses would be in the discipline. Schuman noted that, although the computer science faculty proposed this course, the course will reside in Interdisciplinary Studies. Korth said the course was projected to have 5 sections and enroll 150 students each year. Leroux thought that having too many 2-credit courses would be a problem. Schuman said he thought too few 2-credit courses would leave students without enough options for mixing and matching. McIntosh noted that the computer science discipline is offering quite a few 2-credit courses.

Ballou noted that this course corresponds to portions of CSci 1100. Will CSci 1100 be expanded in semesters? Korth said CSci 1100 goes away in semesters.

Thielke wondered how many credits a course needs in order to be part of the General Education Program. Mooney said 2 credits.

MOTION (Understood): To approve the proposal to add IS 1091, Ethical and Social Implications of Technology, in the semester system.

VOTE: Unanimous in favor (8-0-0).

Schuman said, having passed the semester curriculum last year, we need to go back and find out what General Education Requirement (GER) each course will fulfill. The intention is that each course will fulfill one category of the GER. In many disciplines, this has already been thought through. Mooney said the Form C (Add) and Form C (GenEd) have been distributed to the Divisions with a deadline of November 24.

Farrell wondered if the Dean's Office would pay for duplication of forms for each semester course. He noted that the disciplines have to determine the GER categories for individual courses. Schuman said the Divisions could charge the Dean's Office budget for this duplicating.

Farrell wondered if the GER categories will go through the GEC. Schuman said they could, if the GEC stays in existence. Farrell said he expects to have the Division approve the designations. Korth and Kissock said they did not plan to get Divisional approval. Thielke said the Divisions need to oversee the requests for exceptions. Schuman said he did not want to force Divisions to go through the approval process if they don't think it is necessary. He is comfortable leaving the decision in the hands of the Divisions. Kissock noted that we approved the semester courses and the general education program last spring thinking that the GEC would go away. He agreed that the Divisions should have overview of the general education categories assigned to each course. He would have the Division approve the designators and send them to the CC.

Thielke said she was concerned that the Division review the number of courses in each GER category to be sure that there are enough. She is particularly worried about having enough courses for the Environment category.

Schuman thought someone might want to move that the CC wants to receive from each Division a listing of all courses to be offered in the semester system with proposed general education categories. Ballou thought this should start at the Divisional level and go through the GEC. Can students meet their requirements with courses outside the major? The answer was yes. Ballou wondered who would determine that there are enough courses to meet demand. Schuman said that is why the information needs to be gathered now. Ballou asked if the CC or the GEC would review the lists. Schuman said if the GEC recommends its own discontinuation, then the CC could do the review or say that the GEC must continue to exist. Farrell wondered, if the recommendation were to discontinue the committee, whether the termination would happen this year or next year. Right now the process is for general education proposals to go from the discipline to the GEC to the Division to the CC.

Schuman said the Divisions should submit the GER lists to the CC for all semester courses. If we find that we still have a GEC, then we can refer the lists to them for review.

MOTION (Farrell, Kissock): To ask the Divisions to submit to the CC a list of all semester courses with assigned GER categories. If the GEC still exists, the lists will be submitted to that committee for review.

VOTE: Unanimous in favor (8-0-0).

Schuman said the schedule of meetings for the remainder of the quarter would be sent out soon (see section on "Meeting Time"). The next meeting will be on Tuesday, October 28, at 8:00 a.m. in the Behmler Conference Room.

Meeting adjourned 8:50 a.m.
Submitted by Nancy Mooney

Send comments to Nancy Mooney
Send comments to the Curriculum Committee