Minutes
College of Arts and Sciences
Faculty Senate Meeting
February 22, 2017
Present: Alber, Beauchaine, Bielefeld, Bitters, Bystydzienski, Clopper, Crocetta, Fink, Flinn, Gerlach, Hawkins, Herzog, Isurin, Jenkins, Jorati, Kennedy, King, Klompen, Krissek (guest), Levin, Liu, Minozzi, Montalto (guest), O’Sullivan, Perez, Sanders, Sinnot, Smith, Stenzel, Tan, Torrance
Call to order/Welcome/Announcements
Chair Jim Sanders called the meeting to order at 3:35 pm. Jim reminded everyone that this body is still in need of a chair-elect, who will take over as chair next year. Please let him know asap if you might be interested.
Approval of minutes
The minutes for the January 27, 2017 meeting were approved unanimously.
Curricular update
Associate Executive Dean Steve Fink provided a few updates. He mentioned the plans for restructuring the Career Services Office, whose services will expand to encompass coordination of additional experiential learning (beyond the current internship offerings), a new sophomore level career-planning course, and assistance for graduate students. He will continue to update this group on the progress of the restructuring.
Steve noted that the upcoming (March 7) meeting of the departmental undergrad studies directors will include two primary topics: (1) discussion of the relationship between regional campus faculty and their departments here at Columbus, and how the curricular processes do—and do not—affect them; and (2) a listening session with the GE Review Coordinating Committee.
Steve provided some additional information and answered questions about first-year seminars:
· Compensation can be received as supplemental pay or can be placed into research funds. We will add this note to the call for proposals for next year.
· The published deadline for proposals for AU17 is March 1 – although we likely could accept some proposals a bit later than that. If you’re working on a proposal and need to go beyond March 1 to get it in, please let Steve know.
· For seminars that have to be canceled, Steve is happy to talk with folks about possible reasons for that, so please let him know if you would like that information. Often it’s just timing; sometimes the title might need tweaked; etc. “If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.”
· The enrollment limits are 18, and the minimum enrollment (for the seminar to not be canceled) is 12.
Graduate Student Housing
Jim Sanders noted that administrators involved with the plans for graduate student housing have agreed to attend a future meeting of this body.
Campus Safety
Tom Hawkins reported on his conversation with Monica Moll (), director of OSU’s Department of Public Safety. She expressed interest in and willingness to schedule meetings, training sessions, etc. regarding campus safety concerns, education, protocol, etc. She also is happy to make referrals to colleagues for additional information and follow up. Faculty and/or departments should feel free to contact her directly to arrange something.
Tom asked her for answers to the following questions, related to instructors’ responses when a crisis occurs:
· What is our legal obligation with respect to “sheltering in place,” especially if someone wants to leave rather than following the directive to shelter in place? ANSWER: None. The students are adults and have the right to leave if they so desire.
· What is our obligation with respect to people we see not “sheltering” after we’ve been told to “shelter in place”? ANSWER: There is no obligation to try to get them to join your “shelter.”
· What if someone else wants to be “in charge” (due to experience in the military, etc.)? ANSWER: That’s fine if you are comfortable with it. The important thing is to respond as a “human group.”
· What about classrooms that have doors that cannot be locked or barricaded? (There is no quick or easy answer to this question.)
Presentation regarding the process for the review of General Education (GE)
Larry Krissek and Cathy Montalto, co-chairs of the review coordinating committee, delivered a power-point presentation regarding the history of the GE, the reasons for the decision to conduct a review at this time, and the process for the review. The power-point presentation will be loaded to the Buckeye Box folder and also will be sent to everyone before the next meeting. The hope is that the next meeting will include a Listening Session with Larry, Cathy, and some other members of the committee.
The key points that were mentioned include:
· Half of the committee members are from ASC.
· Some historical information:
o The GE was established in 1988 (as the GEC, or General Education Curriculum) as a distribution model. There were reviews in 1996, 2002, and 2007, none of which resulted in significant structural changes.
o The University-Level Advisory Committee for the GEC/GE (ULAC) was created in 2007 as a subcommittee of the Council on Academic Affairs (CAA).
o The GEC was reviewed at semester conversion but, due to the short timeline, only minor changes were made; it was then renamed GE.
· As of August 2014, about 50% of GE enrollments are in fewer than 60 courses.
· The Assessment Panel of the ASC Curriculum Committee is charged with assessing the GE. Because we have no program-wide goals or learning outcomes that are actually assessable, GE assessment is category-by-category and course-by-course rather than as a program. Assessment reports are typically submitted on a 5-7 year cycle, with new courses being asked to submit a report after the first two offerings.
· The review is happening now because:
o The current program is nearly 30 years old.
o The faculty “owns the curriculum,” but 50% of the current faculty have been at OSU for 10 years or fewer, so they don’t really “own” this GE.
o Our student population is very different from what it was 30 years ago.
o There are additional considerations that didn’t exist (or at least, not to the extent they do now) when the GEC was created, such as more AP/IB courses, dual enrollment, College Credit Plus, etc.
o Outcomes assessment has become a nationwide trend.
o Many other institutions are also doing GE review at this time.
· The process will follow this projected/estimated timeline:
o Spring 2017 – Information-gathering via listening sessions and possibly a survey.
o Summer 2017 – Review of information gathered; development of an outline of goals and possible templates.
o Autumn 2017 – Seek feedback on the goals and templates; report back to committees, CAA, etc.
o After Autumn 2017 – approval by all pertinent bodies, and then implementation.
· The primary questions to be asked are:
o What should be the big-picture goals of OSU’s General Education program?
o What should all OSU graduates know and be able to do?
o What structure(s) will meet these goals? Be coherent? Serve student needs? Be adjustable for the future? Integrate assessment?
· With respect to the framework, nothing has been decided yet. The committee will consider many ideas, suggestions, and models. There are a variety of models to consider, including:
o Common experiences
o Themes
o A core curriculum
o Learning communities with student cohorts
o Upper-level requirements designed to “tier” through the years, with portfolio review and/or other forms of evaluation
· SUNY-Buffalo has a very new hybrid model that’s a good example. That, and those at other institutions, will be reviewed and discussed before recommendations are made. (See the power point presentation for additional examples.)
· The committee has been instructed to make recommendations independent of the budget model, so we should think broadly and creatively about this, separate from how budgets might be affected.
Questions that were raised included:
· Will all colleges be required to follow/adhere to the same GE? ANSWER: Not sure. One goal is to have one GE that applies to everyone, but that may not be possible due to accreditation requirements for our own “tagged” degrees as well as degrees in colleges outside ASC.
· Is there a definite target date for when the new GE program will be rolled out? ANSWER: No.
Remaining spring semester meeting dates
March 29 and April 26
Meeting adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Ellen Jenkins
Assistant Executive Dean
College of Arts and Sciences
2