UMM CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
2012-13 MEETING #9 Minutes
November 29, 2012, 1:00 p.m., MFR
Members Present: Bart Finzel (chair), Charlie Abraham, Joe Alia, Donna Chollett, Carol Cook, Pilar Eble, Pieranna Garavaso, Josh Godding, Aaron Goemann, Sara Haugen, Leslie Meek, Peh Ng, Gwen Rudney, Jeri Squier, Tisha Turk, and Zac Van Cleve
Members Absent: Clare Dingley
Visitors: Melissa Engleman, Nancy Helsper
In these minutes: EDP Review Subcommittee Recommendation; Course Revision (IS 2035); spring semester meeting schedule
Approval of Minutes – October 25, 2012
MOTION (Cook/Garavaso) to approve the October 25, 2012 minutes. Motion passed by unanimous voice vote.
EDP Review Subcommittee Recommendation
Finzel explained that the following Educational Development Program (EDP) funding priorities were provided in the guidelines given to the EDP Review Subcommittee, in no particular order: 1) courses that integrate sustainability across the liberal arts; 2) Intellectual Community (IC) courses; and 3) efforts to develop innovative “hybrid” courses. Well-developed proposals that address a significant need within the curriculum or that will benefit large numbers of students were also to be considered. The Subcommittee was chaired by Turk and included Alia and Goemann. Turk was asked to present the Subcommittee’s report.
Turk stated that there was a balanced group of proposals. This year 17 proposals were submitted, requesting $48,300. The amount available for the program this year is $24,000. Although they would have liked to have been able to fund a large number of proposals, the Subcommittee recommends full funding of eight proposals and partial funding of a ninth. Turk recused herself from the Subcommittee’s discussion of her own proposal.
Turk reported that the Subcommittee immediately came to an agreement on the top three proposals. The remaining consensus was not easily reached, with each member advocating for at least one that ultimately went unfunded. In following the priority list given to the Subcommittee, one is an IC course, one is a hybrid course, and two are sustainability courses. Also, one from each of three divisions (the Humanities, Science and Mathematics, and the Social Sciences) didn’t fit those categories but seemed to represent important curricular innovations that affect a significant number of students. All the top three recommended courses were strongly recommended by their division chairs. The top three, in alpha order are:
Turk briefly noted the following six recommendations for funding (in alpha order):
In the event that one or more recommended proposals are withdrawn, the subcommittee short-listed two proposals (listed in priority order):
The remaining proposals that were not recommended were (in alpha order):
Turk stated that the rationale for funding or not funding proposals was put on the proposals. Garavaso asked if the people who applied will receive the feedback. The comments on the ones not funded would be helpful. Finzel stated that they will receive a letter as well as the proposals with the rationale included. Ng stated that the Subcommittee did an awesome job. She asked why the Cole/Wyckoff proposal was not funded when it is clear they are trying to make an effort to create a hybrid in order to spend more time in class doing problem-solving. Turk replied that it was clear from the proposal, that, in contrast to others that were funded, which involved very significant reimagining of courses, this proposal was revamping three weeks of the course, which seems less in need of funding than the other similar proposals that were funded (e.g., those from Ryan Van Zee and Dean).
Finzel stated that he hopes that some proposals will go forward even without funding. There may be some additional funding available from other initiatives in other areas, and if he can find it, he will follow the recommendation of the committee and move down the list or at least to fully fund the partial recommendation. He added that one of the hardest things to do is to give money away, being fair and balanced, while pleasing everyone, and thanked the Subcommittee for its work.
Motion: (Cook/Garavaso) to approve the funding recommendation of the EDP Review Subcommittee.
The motion passed unanimously (14-0-0).
Interdisciplinary Studies Course Revision
IS 2035 – Aging in Greece: Comparative Cultural Practices and Social Policy
Finzel stated that the increase in credits (change from 2 to 4 credits) allows students to take a directed study in addition to a study abroad, resulting in a six-credit package that then makes them eligible for financial aid. Eble stated that trying to get to six credits when they may not need more than two to graduate, is ill-advised because financial aid is not free money. They will be compelled to pay more. Goemann asked if this is a separate course from the directed study. Finzel answered that it often is done where the study abroad is located, followed by the directed study.
MOTION (Turk/Ng) to approve the change of IS 2035 from 2 to 4 credits.
The motion passed unanimously (14-0-0).
Spring Semester Meeting Schedule
Finzel stated that this is the final meeting of fall semester. In spring semester, the committee will meet on Tuesday mornings at 9:00 AM in the Moccasin Flower Room. The first meeting of the semester will be Tuesday, January 22. The meeting schedule is posted on the Curriculum Committee website and Darla will send a reminder. We will meet monthly in the early part of the semester, and will meet more frequently the latter half of the semester.
Finzel thanked the Committee for its hard work during fall semester.
Submitted by Darla Peterson