University of Minnesota, Morris

Morris, MN

 

Minutes 2005-2006 Curriculum Committee Meeting # 2 November 3, 2005, 2:30 p.m. Moccasin Flower Room

 

Present:           John Schwaller, Michael Korth, Judy Kuechle, Tap Payne, Jooinn Lee, Harold Hinds, Van Gooch, Maggie Stewart, Jared Warren, Jeri Mullin, Nancy Helsper, and Matt Conner.

 

Absent:           Isaac Linehan-Clodfelter, Carol Marxen, Tom McRoberts, Heather Michaelson, Ray Schultz, and. Clare Strand

 

Meeting was opened by John Schwaller at 2:35. 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Approval of the minutes from October 6, 2005.

 

Motion: (Gooch, Hinds) to approve the minutes from meeting #1

 

VOTE: Motion passed (8–0­–0)

 

 

Courses for Approval:

ArtH 3311 CE: Italian Art in Context

 

Motion: (Hinds, Payne) to approve ArtH 3311

 

Discussion was held on why the class is only one credit; Payne said it is a one week course during spring break.

 

VOTE: Motion passed (8–0–0)

 

Geog 3251 The Politics of Claiming and Reclaiming Space

 

MOTION: (Kuechle, Korth) to approve Geog 3251

 

VOTE: Motion passed (8– 0–0).

This course was tabled at the last meeting to find out if it meets SSci Sec Ed licensure requirements. It does.

 

IS 3011 English Language Teaching Assistant Program for Majors

 

MOTION: (Kuechle, Stewart) to approve IS 3011

 

VOTE:            Motion passed (8–0–0)

 

This course was tabled at the last curriculum committee meeting.  The catalog description was changed to explain how this course differs from IS 2011.

 

 

Phil 2151 Philosophy of Mind

 

MOTION: (Payne, Korth) to approve Phil 2151

VOTE: Motion passed (8–0–0)

Clarification of description and faculty sponsor was added to the form after if had been tabled at the last curriculum committee meeting.  Nancy Helsper brought up the fact that the description is already in the current catalog.  She asked why we, as a committee, were being asked to approve a course already in the catalog that doesn’t appear to have any proposed change from the catalog entry.  Kuechle asked what changes were made.  Schwaller said he and Helsper would look into this. Mullin explained that Philosophy did not believe it was an active course and so required Curriculum Committee action to reactivate it.

 

#5 Discuss Product Idea

            MOTION: (Hinds, Warren) to table this until further clarification.

 

            VOTE: Motion passed (8–0–0)

 

#6 “General Education” as a possible theme for FYS

           

There was much discussion regarding this topic. The current theme for FYS is Human Diversity.  Korth mentioned that the initial intent for FYS was designed to have changing topics.  Kuechle asked what a FYS class based on the theme of “General Education” would look like?  Hinds suggested that one theme could be used in many ways.  Korth said the phrase, “General Education” is not something you teach, but something you do. Helsper explained that the ASL was looking for a way to stress to students the importance of the Liberal Arts.  Our graduates in the General Education Survey rate their achievement of the general ed requirements much higher than the importance of those requirements.

It was asked, would faculty members embrace this topic?  Stewart thought it could be incorporated into the different subjects quite readily, for instance, “A biology teacher could discuss and teach the importance of literature in his subject.” 

Payne mentioned that the importance of the Liberal Arts education sounds more like a debate in Campus Assembly than a class subject. Schwaller asked if this committee should discuss the possibility and give ideas to another group to develop, or if we should give it to a larger group for them to formulate?  Korth said he would like to see it involve a larger group than just the FYS instructors.  He also mentioned that the Curriculum Committee could discuss this shortly and look for more ideas or open it up to the campus for broader discussion.  The question was asked by Haugen are we compelled to change topics at this time. If Liberal Arts were the topic instead of diversity would the 16 or 17 faculty be teaching similar topics?  The students now are not aware of the value of a Liberal Arts education and they do not understand why they need it. Warren was asked for his opinion, he thought we could somehow combine the two topics, how to better understand the Liberal Arts within the diversity of our campus.

Payne would like to solicit the faculty for their thought on the idea of topic change.  Haugen said it is possible the FYS committee may have already discussed this and may have some input.

Warren asked if there was some way there could be a sampling of the FYS right now as to how they feel about the subject. Schwaller said he does this already by reading all the evaluations of FYS classes.  He said generally there are about 15% of the students who are very unhappy and 15% who are somewhat unhappy with FYS, the topic, the requirements, etc.  Hinds mentioned that the 4th year students are not clear about the importance of a Liberal arts Education.  Stewart added that a sampling of the 4th year student will be different from a 1st year student sampling.  More than likely if a student is unhappy with the FYS experience he will have moved on. 

It was brought up that we could call the “Gen Eds”  “Liberal Eds” instead, to emphasize what Liberal Arts education is about.  Helsper asked the committee to consider, if not through an FYS theme, what would be the most appropriate way to deal with the concern that students don’t understand the importance of a liberal arts education.

Schwaller asked for a motion by asking if we wish to look into this issue this year. Payne said it is appropriate to reevaluate the topics.  The consensus of the committee is to look into the possibility of changing the topic; Schwaller will ask the current FYS faculty about their thoughts on this issue. 

 

Meeting was adjourned at 3:06

Submitted by Judy Van Eps