University of Minnesota, Morris
Morris, Minnesota

May 7, 1997; 3:00 p.m.; Behmler Conference Room

Present: Ballou, Ellis, Farrell, Frenier, Hansen, Kuechle (for Kissock), Korth, J. Lee, Schuman, Thielke, Whelan

Absent: Bauer, Davis, Imholte, M. Lee, Vickstrom

Guest(s): None

Schuman indicated that CC members should have received two separate packets of materials for this meeting which together makes a complete set of semester proposals for the Division of the Humanities. He thought the CC might want to deal with the issue of disciplines with proposed major requirements totaling more than 40 credits in one discipline. He invited Farrell, as Chair of the Division, to make introductory comments.

Farrell said he had two replacement handouts--one for Art History and one for Humanities. The changes do not alter the content of the proposals. Courses were added to Art History because a new faculty position was added. The new faculty member taught new courses as topics in 1996-97. In Humanities, a similar situation has occurred. Some specific topics were dropped to allow more flexibility for instructors to choose their own topics. He noted that some majors have more than 40 credits in a single discipline: Music and Theatre. In Art History, the total credits in the major are over 40, but some of those credits are in Studio Art. The Art History major has the same sequence as it had under quarters.

Schuman said that the Graz program mentioned in the German discipline materials has disappeared. The campus heard about this change last week. It should be editorial to make that change.

Thielke noted that 12 credits in the Studio Art major are from outside Studio Art. There is a Philosophy of Art course. Farrell said the Division doesn't have anyone to teach Philosophy of Art at this time. Thielke said there are 52 credits for the ArtS major, with 8 credits of ArtH. Lee pointed out that there were actually 12 credits of ArtH required in the ArtS major. Thielke and Farrell agreed.

Lee asked about the Speech Communication mapping form. How can a course map "1.5 to 1"? Schuman indicated that half of the course is mapped to one course and half to another.

The CC decided to discuss the semester proposals in a systematic way, beginning with Art History.

Art History Proposal
Farrell said the revised proposal distributed at the beginning of the meeting has changes on the mapping form. The topics courses will be offered as new courses.

Thielke was concerned that there are no 2000-level courses. Schuman did not think that would work, but he considered it an editorial problem. Farrell said there was a lot of confusion in the Division about numbering. Schuman said we will have to do some tinkering with numbers this summer and go back to the disciplines next year. Farrell said some of the foreign language courses say they are at the 2000-level, but they should be available for both freshmen and sophomores. Ballou wondered if no sequence was required in the foreign language courses. Farrell said there is a sequence, but intermediate courses are not necessarily taken in the second year. Each discipline will have peculiarities and should make a case for the appropriate level.

Ballou noted that there are 42 credits in the ArtH major, with 6 credits from ArtS. Farrell agreed; Art History and Studio Art are two distinct disciplines. Ballou saw that two courses on the old mapping form--Art of Ancient Greece and Art of Ancient Rome--were linked from quarter courses. On the revised mapping form, they appear as new courses with no link to quarters. Were those topics courses? Farrell said that they were.

Whelan wondered if the standard of saying "not offered" in a certain academic year had been changed. He saw that the bulletin copy showed courses with "not offered 2000." Farrell thought it was an editorial oversight not to list the academic year rather than a single year. He noted that Philosophy has been an exception to the standard because they have 5-quarter sequences. They list the years offered because they are not offered in alternate years. Schuman said that the quarter should be listed in that case.

Humanities Proposal
Schuman noted that these are general humanities courses not housed in a specific discipline.

Ballou asked about the statistical summary. For the General Education Program (GEP), they have some numbers for the quarter system but nothing under the semester system. Mooney said the General Education section was to be left blank since we don't have an approved semester GEP yet. Farrell said the numbers in that section show the intent of the discipline, but all of the humanities courses are offered when feasible. Whelan said ArtH shows 21 credits in GEP for semesters. Are they making an assumption? Farrell said he thought they were making an assumption and that would be true for any discipline which has entered numbers in the GEP section. Schuman thought it was helpful to see where the discipline thought it would be in terms of GEP courses.

Studio Art
Schuman reminded CC members that, although 52 credits are required for the major, that includes 12 credits of Art History courses. He was struck by the fact that none of the courses are 4-credit courses. He is not troubled by that, but wanted to be sure the CC was aware of it. Students sometimes complain that they put in just as much work for a 5-credit English course as they do for a 3-credit ArtS course.

Hansen thought it would be very time consuming if the student needs 52 credits and the courses are all 2-3 credit offerings. Thielke said the ArtS major is time consuming now under quarters. In order to build a baccalaureate program in the fine arts, they need to offer a broad range of courses. The discipline must offer courses with fewer credits in order to offer all the experiences they need. Schuman noted that the quarter major totals 74 credits (including many outside the discipline).

Whelan wondered if a 3-credit ArtS course would be recognized as being more work than normal. Schuman said that depends on what "normal" is. If one counts the hours spent in the studio as "outside the classroom" work, then it might be more than normal. Farrell said students have asked to have the studio open 24 hours of the day. Students spend a lot of time fixing problems with their end products. Whelan said the "norm" should be 9 hours of work per week for a 3-credit course. He would be concerned if the expectation is more than that in order to make it through the class. Farrell said the expectation under semesters would be no greater than it was under quarters. Schuman thought it was impossible to measure the average time spent in studio work for ArtS students. The time would be different for each project and each student. Whelan said the philosophy in his course syllabi is for 15 hours/week. He is not worried if students spend 20 hours, but it they spend 25 hours to get through the course, that is not fair to the students. Schuman said his guess would be that, on the average, art students spend on a 3-credit course three-quarters of the amount of time others spend on a 4-credit course, in and out of class. The answer to the question is that Schuman does not think the 3-credit courses are a ruse to allow them to spend more time in the major.

Farrell did not think this issue could be addressed by the CC. If students have complaints, they should take them to the discipline faculty or to Farrell. Lee commented that, as long as ArtS is considered an exceptional case, perhaps the CC should accept it. If this option were open to everyone, we would have a problem. Thielke noted that they worked out a 2/3 ratio.

Schuman said the question is: Are we going to allow ArtS to continue an idiosyncratic credit module? Farrell was not sure the credit module should be considered idiosyncratic. For instance, the faculty workload issue caused the French discipline to change 4-credit courses to 5-credit courses. This is the way the discipline has worked out its curriculum. Why would we change it at this point?

Korth suggested that the questions really require answers from Studio Art faculty. The CC should not spend time guessing at the answers. Schuman thought that was a good point. Should we invite someone from ArtS to the next meeting? Lee said the CC could ask Farrell to check it out. Farrell said the answer is that they need to provide a variety of experiences in the major. Schuman asked for a show of hands for those who wanted to invite ArtS faculty to the meeting. There was only 1 vote in favor. Schuman said we could ask them to send a written note. Farrell volunteered to do that.

Whelan said he, too, assumed that there was no ruse. They are just dividing the pie differently. But he would appreciate hearing from the discipline.

Ballou asked for clarification. The major requirements identify 1xxx through 1xxx. How many credits does that include--all of them? Thielke said it does include all of them. Farrell said it is the same sequence they required under quarters. Ballou wondered what the difference was between ArtS and basic studio. Schuman said the first "ArtS" is simply the Studio Art moniker.

Schuman said it would be helpful to get a note of explanation from the discipline.

Schuman indicated that German is proposing two new courses. He had already mentioned the dropping of the Graz program. Hansen asked why the Graz program was being dropped. Farrell said there was insufficient interest on the part of students. There are other German language programs available through Global Campus. Hansen asked if this was a UMM or Twin Cities program. Farrell said it was a Twin Cities program. Ballou wondered if Professor Sibul was involved with the Graz program. Farrell said no; Sibul was involved with the Kassel, Germany program which was dropped in favor of the Graz program. Now they will have to find a new one.

Frenier wondered why the German play is changing from 1 credit to 4 credits. Farrell said the course has not been offered since 1985. He has encouraged the discipline to drop it. The course has been offered on an overload basis. The thought is that students don't take the course because it is only offered for 1 credit. They would like to turn it into a more significant offering as an advanced oral language course.

Korth observed that there is a large number of proposed courses in all three foreign languages--the same number as under quarters. He assumed that the faculty have figured out a way to teach all of these courses. Schuman wondered if there is more rotation in course offerings. Farrell said yes.

Schuman said the CC will have to meet Friday this week to continue the discussion of Humanities proposals. He wondered if CC members want to have faculty from Theatre and Music present to explain the credits required in the major. Farrell wondered if they could provide a written explanation if no one is available to come to the meeting. Schuman said he would be comfortable with that, although the CC may still want to talk to them. What is the CC's wish? Ballou said written explanations were fine with her. Schuman asked Farrell to request written explanations.

Schuman said the issue with "dead courses" is to identify the circumstances which would allow a deleted course to be resurrected. Courses which have gone through the Curriculum Committee and been deleted from the course catalog are still in the computer database. It has been the practice in some disciplines to sometimes resuscitate a "dead" course, even years after it has been dropped from the bulletin, under the premise that it was once offered. It is not a good idea for a discipline to decide on its own to revive a course. What should be the mechanism? Should revived courses be approved by the Division Chair, the Dean, or the Curriculum Committee, in any combination or permutation? Schuman would be inclined to have the CC decide, since the CC decided to drop the course in the first place. Most of the time, it would probably be a routine decision.

Thielke said other things come into play, as well. Student demand for courses changes, especially as changes occur in graduate school requirements. A need for a course can come up. So much effort goes into putting a course together and developing it. Sometimes an old course is requested during registration.

Farrell thought the Division Chair should approve the change. If the course is to be offered on a regular basis, then it would go through the Curriculum Committee. Schuman suggested that a one-time-only offering be approved by the Division Chair and any more offerings than that would have to go through the Curriculum Committee. There was agreement of CC members to that suggestion.

The next meeting is scheduled for Friday, May 9, 9:00 p.m., Behmler Conference Room, to continue the discussion of Humanities semester proposals with Philosophy.

Meeting adjourned 4:00 p.m.
Submitted by Nancy Mooney

Send comments to Nancy Mooney
Send comments to the Curriculum Committee