of Minnesota, Morris
MINUTES 2000-2001 CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEETING #14
March 19, 2001 3:30 p.m. Behmler Conference Room
Finzel, Evans, Chabel, Carlson, Mooney Gooch, De Jager, Lee Thielke and Garavaso
in for Nellis
Absent Neuharth, Urness, Behrens, Kissock and Ostrowski
Approval of Minutes: Korth asked for a motion to approve the revised minutes showing the changes from the first draft from the March 19, 2001 meeting.
approve minutes from March 19, 2001.
VOTE: Unanimous in favor (7-0-0)
Curricular Change Proposal: The following courses require CC approval:
Econ 4909 and Econ 4910, these are both topics courses that now have GER designators
History 3704, 3705, 3706, 3103, 3153 and 3552, these are also all topics courses that now have GER designators.
SeEd 4201, this course had a GER designator previously of HDiv however, during the changes last fall this was mistakenly taken out. Education would like it added back to the course.
MOTION: (Finzel, Carlson) To approve all proposed course changes.
Discussion: A member questioned the addition of the HDiv designator to SeEd 4201. Another member stated that he noticed it was missing when he was advising a student, he then contacted the Registrar's Office and the Education Division and was told it was a mistake and should not have been removed from the course. A member noted that when our students are student teaching they do see a very diverse group of individuals.
VOTE: Unanimous in favor (7-0-0)
EDP Subcommittee recommendations: A member of the subcommittee stated that the letter sent out to the CC members explained their decisions as to EDP awards. When a member asked for clarification as to the criteria used by the subcommittee for their recommendations the subcommittee member stated that they followed the criteria explained in the letter. Another member questioned if the EDP subcommittee looked at disciplines that have fewer classes available to students than other disciplines. The EDP subcommittee members stated that was not a deciding factor and that they looked at each proposal based on its own merit.
MOTION: Proposed by the EDP Subcommittee in the letter attached. VOTE: Unanimous in favor (7-0-0)
Undisclosed Attendance Requirements in a Course: Korth asked if CC has received any data. A subgroup of CC members who are collecting data sent an email to all faculty members requesting information regarding undisclosed attendance requirements. They will send out another e-mail request and bring what information they have to the next CC meeting. A member asked if it would be worthwhile to also get information from students. The subgroup will try to send a request to students also, as they may be more likely to respond. Korth noted that faculty may have been hesitant to respond not knowing that this was official CC business. A member of the sub-group stated they could e-mail again with a note that Korth requests the information for the CC. Another member noted that course information on the web for the TC Campus is boiled down information of syllabi information collected; i.e. exams, written work, group work, what to expect and even what percent of their grade is each course requirement. This gives students the opportunity to plan their workload before they enroll. Korth noted this information would be nice however at this time we are just looking for consistency in the catalog. We will return to this agenda item at our next CC meeting.
For Information Purposes: The CRPC has endorsed the proposals for Anthropology and Statistic Majors. This will come back to the CC and will need to be acted upon before Campus Assembly in Mid-April. This will be on our next agenda.
Online Catalog: Korth raised the question of our online catalog being our official catalog, also current updates and possible elimination of a written catalog. A member noted that the catalog is our written contract with the student, would there be legal issues with no printed catalog? Another member noted that students choose which catalog/bulletin they are under. What requirements would be enforced if there were no written catalog? A member noted there were changes before the catalog was even printed; it's outdated already. Another member stated that he understood that a student could graduate under the printed regulations in the current catalog at the time they are enrolled in UMM. If we can keep the most current and previous catalog on the web this might be a reasonable compromise. Mooney stated that the TC Campus has a separate link to the catalog and majors are not in the online catalog. She does not have access to update the catalog and this would be a lot of work. A member asked about ECAS and the Mooney stated that ECAS does not have major updates either. Another member questioned how a student would know of changes/updates being made, such as GER designators. There was discussion among several members as to how changes could be available to students. Some suggestions were: 1) that the discipline would notify the students of changes; 2) to send changes with APAS reports 3) to have a web database up to the minute; or 4) students could get an updated APAS at registration and changes in between. A member questioned how the TC campus handles revisions and how do students know about them. A member stated that the TC does not seem to be worried about it. Another member stated that the problems could be so few that they can be handled individually and likes the idea of having accurate information available. Another member questioned how much work it would be to have the changes updated every semester. Mooney noted that online catalog is done at the TC campus, they set it up as an html document. A member stated it would be good to have updates done more frequently but unsure of the amount of work involved. Some members noted that right now the changes are just in peoples' heads, not posted anywhere. A member questioned if just Major/Minor changes could be put on the web and faculty and advisors could be notified of the changes. A member noted that only Major information is missing on the web not course information. Some Majors have web pages and some do not, Major changes could be someplace else to update and keep current. There was a question as to who would have the final say about an online catalog? It was suggested that the Catalog Editor would have the final say however the Catalog Editor would go to someone else for approval. Korth noted that he isn't hearing much enthusiasm for a full online catalog or updating courses beyond what we have. However he did hear support for updated major requirements. A member noted that updates to Majors could be put on with an effective date to cover the issue of what was required at the time a student enrolled for graduation requirements. Korth noted at this time there is no motion and maybe does not need a CC decision. Korth asked the Registrar and Catalog Editor to think about the issue.
Approval Process of Topics Courses: It was questioned why we have two classes of courses, those that get regular approval and those that don't? What is the need of topics courses and why can't they be approved in the regular process. A member stated that it could be the amount of work involved to get approval because topics courses change so often. A member noted that now we have to have course descriptions while before we didn't, so the requirements have changed. A member noted that topics courses use a number and stays in the database forever even if it isn't taught. How are they different? A member questioned if courses approved by Campus Assembly have to be in the catalog? Another member noted that Topics Courses and Continuing Education courses do not have to be listed in the catalog and an umbrella course is listed in the catalog to cover topics courses. A member noted that Computer Science courses are one example why the regular approval process isn't always possible. Computer Science needs to keep current with the changing field and since CA doesn't meet that often they can't always go through regular approval. Another member noted that a course can get provisional approval in 2 weeks and Campus Assembly meets more than once a year.
When a member questioned how long before a course can be taught two members responded that after the 2 weeks it takes for provisional approval the courses can be taught. Another member noted that approval is for convenience and flexibility. With new faculty there is not always time to go through Campus Assembly. A member noted that one issue is the speed at which the administrative process is expected to respond, it is easy to get approval but not always easy to get students in the class. A member questioned if the approval process of topics courses is now an issue because of consistency or because the courses don't meet the requirements? Korth noted that the approval process for topics courses is getting messy, little problems have multiplied such as issues with GER designators, prerequisites, CC and CA approval. If topics courses were treated as regular courses in regards to approval it would be easier. A member mentioned that another way to look at this situation is that all courses taught would be reviewed and have the scrutiny of the CC, which was set up for this purpose. When questions of GER or other issues arise it was noted that in some situations the instructor has been challenged and made changes. This may create a problem of timely approval; however, the CC does have a function to perform. A member questioned if GER's and prereqs are forgotten when courses go through approval? Another member stated that yes they can be and courses have been pushed through with no GER. If topic courses are approved the same as other courses then there may not be a need for umbrella courses. A member stated that if the reason for topics courses is for flexibility, there would be no other reason to have them. A member stated that this issue is confusing for faculty, some topics courses go through regular approval and some do not.
Korth will draft a motion to be acted upon at the next meeting.
Meeting adjourned 4:32 p.m.
Submitted by Karen Van Horn