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 subcommittee’s 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 Dean’s 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 Committee’s final meeting of the year will be held May 6.
Meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m.
Submitted by Darla Peterson