UMM CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
MEETING #15 Minutes
April 15, 2008, 3:00 p.m., Behmler 130
Present: Roland Guyotte (chair), Escillia
Allen, Van Gooch, Judy Kuechle, Pareena Lawrence, Jenny Nellis, Gwen Rudney, Laura
Thoma, Kim Ukura, Sara Haugen, Nancy Helsper, Jeri Mullin
Absent: Ferolyn Angell, Harold Hinds,
Michael Korth, Nate Swanson, Clare Strand
Visiting: Brenda Boever
In
these minutes: EDP subcommittee report.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – April 1,
2008
Guyotte
asked for approval of minutes from the April 1, 2008 meeting.
Amendments: Thoma asked that the name Ukura be changed to Thoma in the discussion of Ed 1002.
MOTION: (Gooch/Thoma) To
approve the April 1, 2008 minutes, as amended.
VOTE: Motion
passed (8-0-0)
2. EDP Subcommittee Report
Guyotte stated that the 2008
EDP subcommittee consisted of Committee members Kuechle, Gooch, and Allen. He asked Kuechle, chair of the
subcommittee, to present the subcommitteeÕs recommendations.
Kuechle stated that eleven
proposals were submitted, totaling a request for $22,000. Only seven proposals were recommended
for funding. All were worthwhile
projects, but the subcommittee found that seven had higher rankings and a
higher appeal to the broader campus as well as a greater need for them on the
campus. Guyotte added that there
was only $12,000 to award. Kuechle
thanked the DeanÕs office for bringing the total back to $12,000, after it had
been as low as $8,000 last year.
Ukura asked what EDP is. Kuechle explained that EDP stands for
Educational Development Program.
It provides funding for curriculum development and improvement. The funds are used to enhance the
curriculum by creating new courses or enhancing existing courses. One of the proposals recommended for
funding creates a new course for the new environmental studies major. In most cases it is used to help
faculty put together their plans, readings, and activities to support the
curriculum.
Guyotte added that EDP is one
of the most venerable programs and goes way back. There have been other funding programs to add technology and
for mentoring faculty, but this is one of the oldest and focuses exclusively on
courses. Individuals or teams submit bottom-up kinds of proposals, as opposed
to requesting money for a specific program. This is a grass-roots effort.
Rudney stated that she
noticed the applications were heavily slanted from the science division, as
were the awards. She asked if it
might be that the other divisions were not being attentive and not applying for
the funds. She added that all divisions should be encouraging their faculty to
submit applications. Nellis
replied that the two applications from the humanities division were submitted to
her at the last possible moment, giving her no opportunity to read them and
make suggestions that might have made them better proposals. They were good ideas, but the proposals
could have been stronger. That was
probably noted by the subcommittee.
Kuechle stated that the
subcommittee members were on the same track when they met. They had ranked almost the same across
the board before they met to discuss the proposals.
MOTION: (Gooch/Nellis) To
approve the recommendations of the EDP subcommittee.
VOTE: Motion
passed (8-0-0)
Guyotte encouraged the
Committee members to attend the next Campus Assembly meeting on April 29, 2008. Courses that had been passed at
previous meetings will be on the agenda.
He asked that members be willing to comment and explain items as
necessary. The CommitteeÕs final
meeting of the year will be held May 6.
Meeting
adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
Submitted
by Darla Peterson