University of Minnesota, Morris
MINUTES-1997-98 CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEETING #7
January 20, 1998; 8:00 a.m.; Behmler Conference Room
Present: Asmus, Beiswenger, Ellis, Farrell, Frenier, Korth, Lee, Leroux, McIntosh, Nylander, Schuman, Taylor
Absent: Ballou, Kissock, Thielke
[In these minutes: continued discussion of semester GER designator proposals]
Schuman suggested that the third topic become a general heading of its
own with a new number (it would be Hum 1030). McIntosh wondered what that
would do to the repeatability of the course. Schuman said that specific
topics can only be taken once. Mooney clarified that as soon as a specific
topic title is formulated, then it is given its own course number. No one
should actually be taking a course with the same number as the general heading.
General headings are listed as repeatable to let students know that they
can take more than one specific topic.
Farrell was concerned about humanities having four levels of directed
study when there are only 1xxx-level courses offered. Schuman suggested
that Farrell take that question to the Division when determining the final
directed study levels for each discipline.
Schuman wondered if there were further questions about the humanities
proposal. There were none. He asked Mooney to bring a revised proposal back
to the CC.
Schuman wondered why several of the courses in the major do not have
any designators. Farrell said faculty did not want nonmajors taking those
courses simply to get the GER designation.
Schuman asked if there were any objections to the music proposal. There
There were no other concerns about the philosophy proposal.
Farrell asked the CC for some general advice about the foreign language
disciplines. It seemed to him that all of the foreign languages should have
the same attitude toward directed studies and the levels that are offered.
Schuman thought it would be worthwhile to propose to the foreign language
faculty that they consider offering the same levels of directed studies
in all three languages. Farrell said one must also consider that the three
disciplines are separate.
Schuman wondered about the "SS" category for Interpersonal Communication. Leroux said the course is in "The Self" GER category under quarters. Most of the course focuses on self understanding. Farrell noted that this could conceivably be a course in the Social Science Division. Schuman asked about the overall goals for the "SS" category. Leroux read the goals aloud from the back of the GER form, as follows:
B. Human Behavior, Social Processes and Institutions: To increase students' systematic understanding of themselves as functioning humans, their individual similarities to and differences from others, their awareness of the nature and significance of their conscious experience, and the forces that shape their interpersonal attachments and interactions; or to increase students' understanding of methods of analyzing modern society or some significant legal political, economic, religious, social or scientific component of it.
Leroux noted that a lot of communication study is done in the psychological
area. Some speech communication scholars use social science methods rather
than humanistic ones. Lee thought the choice of designator depended upon
the proportion of the course that focuses on the self. If 90% of the course
is on the skill part of communication, then the designator should not be
"SS." Leroux estimated that 70% of the course focuses on the interpersonal
aspect and less on the skill area. The two interpersonal courses could not
be used to fulfill the speaking requirement.
Schuman asked if CC members were comfortable approving the speech discipline
proposal. There were no objections.
Farrell said he gets complaints from students who are not majors and
don't expect to work as hard as majors in his classes. He thought this was
a generalized problem; other disciplines have declined to designate GER
categories for courses in the major. Schuman agreed.
Leroux wondered if majors who take these courses deserve the GER category.
The answer seemed to be yes. He also wondered if faculty left off GER categories
in order to control enrollment. Schuman said the courses could be open to
majors only. He thought there must be students who don't want to major in
theatre but would want to use theatre to get GER categories fulfilled. He
wondered if theatre faculty should be asked to reconsider categories for
Th 1111, 2101, and 2201.
Farrell wondered what the distribution of credits to the major and general
education was supposed to be under semesters. Schuman said one-half of the
total credits for the degree should be general education and about one-third
of the credits should be in the major. Farrell said he was bothered by the
idea that students won't take a course unless it has a GER designator.
Schuman wondered why students taking beginning acting wouldn't get performance
credit. McIntosh thought that any course meeting the goals should be accurately
designated. Schuman agreed.
Korth thought these questions should be sent back to the discipline.
He wondered if the categories would be dropped for Th 1040 and 1050 because
they are only 1-credit courses.
MOTION (Korth, Frenier): To refer the following questions back to the theatre discipline faculty: 1) Shouldn't Th 1111, 2101, and 2201 have GER designators? 2) Shouldn't Th 1040 and 1050 have the GER designators dropped or else be offered for 2 credits?
VOTE: Unanimous in favor (10-0-0).
There were no other objections to the theatre proposal. Schuman indicated
that all of the Humanities Division GER proposals had been reviewed. Lee
was agreeable to moving on to the Social Science Division GER proposals.
Farrell wondered if there is a description of a lab science course. There
is none within the GER program. Lee wondered if the Science and Math Division
has a description of a lab course. There is no definition in the Division
Meeting adjourned 8:55 a.m.
Submitted by Nancy Mooney