University of Minnesota, Morris
Morris, MN

 

 

MINUTES 2001-2002 CURRICULUM COMMITTEE MEETING # 14

April 29, 2002, 1:00 p.m. Behmler Conference Room

 

Present:           John F. Schwaller, Craig Kissock, Michael Korth, Jooinn Lee, Jenny Nellis, Jim Carlson, Chris DeVries, Van Gooch, Jillian Evans, Bridget Hollermann, Amanda Johnson, Michael Urness, Dorothy De Jager, Nancy Mooney, Jeri Mullin, and, Clare Strand

 

Absent:           Vicky Demos, and Ruth Thielke

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Schwaller asked for a motion to approve the minutes from April 15, 2002.

 

 

MOTION:      (Carlson, Korth) To approve the April 15, 2002 minutes.

 

            VOTE:            (11-0-0) Unanimously approved.

 

FYS STEERING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS:

Schwaller informed CC that the FYS Steering Committee has sent their recommendations on the issues questioned after the review report was done.

 

There was discussion between CC about the recommendations and if action was to be taken on them. Schwaller read the approved motion from the March 4th meeting and stated that CC does have to act on the two issues of topic and consistency of workload.

 

MOTION:      (Kissock, Urness) To approve the FYS Steering Committee’s Recommendations.

 

NO ACTION TAKEN

 

A member questioned what is the recommended workload. DeJager explained that workload was discussed at length and decided that the committee cannot dictate to the faculty the workload but it can offer guidelines. Schwaller explained that the workload issues were not widespread among all sections, half of the complaints came from one section the other half were spread among the remaining 33 sections working out to a small percentage (1.75%) of students that questioned the workload. He also noted that through meetings and frequently asked questions reminders workload requirements will be addressed. A member stated he would like to see clearer recommendations.

 

MOTION:      (Schwaller, Lee) Move to table the motion and request clarity from the FYS Steering Committee on the issues that need to be acted on by CC.

 

VOTE:            (11-0-0) Unanimously approved.

 

HONORS PROGRAM REVIEW:

Schwaller informed CC that the Honors Program Review Committee had meet and had addressed the two proposed questions, 1) Should UMM have an honors program? and 2) If yes, what should that honors program be like? Mike Korth, chair of that committee was asked to outline their report.

 

Korth stated that in their attempt to address these two questions they looked at a variety of materials and received a variety of input from the campus. The committee agreed that there should be an Honors Program at UMM and had outlined what that program might look like. Korth highlighted the areas that would be different from the current program. Late entry, limited entry, simplicity, consistency, and multidisciplinary courses. A member questioned if any of the honors requirements could be fulfilled by off-campus courses/activities. Korth indicated that the program outline would consist of on-campus courses/activities only. He explained that this would be one of the choices students could use to enrich their experience here at UMM. Korth explained it would be a capstone experience with small rigorous classes, purely academic program requirements and the honors courses must be counted in the faculty workload.

 

A member stated that he as been consistently opposed to the Honors Program for the past three years he has been on CC. He stated he felt it was a bad proposal with late and limited entry and concerned also that students who do not get into the honors program would not receive a chance to enroll in multidisciplinary courses. He also questioned why students would be allowed to get a C- in an honors course. A member stated she felt the outline was simple and consistent.

Korth explained that this proposal is not ready to go CA. Schwaller thanked the committee for the work put into the report and asked CC how it would like to proceed. Does CC want to make it ready to be presented to CA, give it to the Dean or give it to the Honors Advisory Committee? Korth stated the review committee had given its response and suggestions to the questions asked and if CC would like to proceed with the issue it could address the questions. Schwaller stated CC would carry this over to the next CC meeting this fall.

 

Meeting adjourned 2:00 p.m.

Submitted by Karen Van Horn