Minutes

College of Arts and Sciences

Faculty Senate Meeting

January 25, 2017

Present: Beauchaine, Bielefeld, Bitters, Blau, Clopper, Crocetta, Dalbey, Fink, Flinn, Fredal, Gerlach, Grotewold, Hawkins, Herzog, Holub, Isurin, Jenkins, Jorati, King, Kline, Klompen, Levin, Liu, Meier, O’Sullivan, Perez, Ramsey, Sanders, Sinnot, Stenzel, Tan, Thompson, Von Frese, J. Wu

Call to order/Welcome/Announcements

Chair Jim Sanders called the meeting to order at 3:35 pm. He passed along Dean Manderscheid’s regrets that he was unable to attend. Jim also 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 meetings of May 11, 2016 and November 30, 2016 were approved.

Curricular update

Associate Executive Dean Steve Fink provided an update on the First-Year Seminars program, which will be better advertised/publicized for the new first-year students attending orientation this summer, including via a short video featuring President Drake. A call for proposals has been sent to all faculty. Note that the deadline for submission of proposals is next month.

Review of the General Education (GE)

Steve provided an update on the impending GE review. Larry Krissek, one of the co-chairs of the review committee, has a long history of service to the college, especially regarding curricular matters. Half of the committee members are from ASC, chosen from recommendations made by ASC deans. Vice Provost Randy Smith and others in OAA are aware of the importance of the ASC faculty in this review.

The timeline for the review has already been adjusted from what was included in the documents distributed to the Senate prior to this meeting. The committee plans to hold “listening sessions” (including multiple conversations with this group and ASCC) during spring semester, and they will then work over the summer to develop some options for the foundations of the revised GE based on what they learned in the listening sessions. Those options will be presented to this body and others across the university in the fall for feedback, and a final recommendation will come after those discussions. The work to implement the new curriculum will occur over the following year.

Steve noted that the university’s budget model continues to be a serious concern for all involved in these discussions, but OAA has indicated that the plan is to devise the best possible GE model for us and our students and then determine how to adjust the budget to allow the model to work. Steve noted that there are other issues at the state level, such as articulation agreements, AP and CLEP credit, etc., but the Ohio Department of Higher Education (ODHE) has told Randy Smith that we should not focus on these issues as we work to develop the best, most appropriate GE model.

It was noted that we’re paying a lot of attention to learning goals and yet the fact of the matter is that many of our students complete a number of their GE requirements by means other than OSU course work (AP and CLEP courses, transfer credit from other schools, College Credit Plus course work, etc.) – and most of that course work does not carry with it the learning goals that are a part of our GE. While there are OSU faculty on the ODHE committees that developed the learning goals for the transfer articulation guides, their voices are not always heard over those of the faculty from the 2-year schools. Steve noted that we (OSU, via OAA) need to keep pushing on this issue.

A question was raised as to what particular models the review committee might already be considering. Are there GE models that are more creative and innovative, as opposed to relying so heavily on introductory, entry-level courses that students often complete while still in high school? Steve noted that some preliminary discussions have mentioned capstone experiences and a greater emphasis on advanced course work. The expectation is that the committee will consider a wide array of models, and we have been told that they are open to any and all ideas. Clearly our current distribution model no longer works, so we need to create a model that is tailored to our institutional goals.

It was noted that we haven’t ever really heard anything from university administration (including deans) that emphasizes the importance of the GE. Steve noted that ULAC (the University-Level Advisory Committee for the GE) created a document at the time of semester conversion that attempted to delineate the university’s goals with respect to the curriculum. Advisors are educated on the philosophy behind the GE, and they attempt to pass that education along to their students. We need to develop a model that moves students away from seeing the GE as “checking off boxes” of requirements that they just need to “get out of the way” – and a model that moves faculty and administrators away from viewing GE courses only as a budgetary issue, i.e., as a way to get “butts in seats.”

If we take seriously our motto of “Education for Citizenship,” we need to identify the things we think our students need to know and understand in order to become good citizens. This review is our chance to become a model for others regarding what a GE should really look like, which is why it will be critical for this body – and all ASC faculty – to participate in the listening sessions that the review committee will be holding. Jim noted that the review committee will be invited to attend meetings of this body asap.

Graduate Student Housing

Concerns were raised about the upcoming changes to graduate student housing, including the planned demolition of some of the buildings and the privatization of the housing as a whole. These plans could price us out of the market for some of our best graduate students, especially those who might lose their easy access to child care by not being able to live in the current housing which is adjacent to the OSU child care center. Having to move elsewhere will create significant challenges for many of these students. We need to identify who the administrators are who should be hearing our concerns and then invite them to attend a future meeting. We need to know the rationale for the housing changes, the options that will be available to students, and where the money will go that presumably will come from privatization. The body agreed that the Senate leadership should move forward with inviting appropriate individuals to speak with us about these concerns.

Campus Safety

There is still significant concern, among both students and faculty, regarding the conceal/carry demonstration that occurred on campus last semester – especially with respect to the lack of communication on the university’s part prior to the demonstration. President Drake indicated in his State of the University address that neither he nor any members of the Board of Trustees has any intention of allowing weapons on campus, but he stopped short of an official statement on the issue. Of course the university has to be mindful of the politics surrounding this issue, but it behooves the administration to find a way to ease the fears of many members of the campus community.

In addition, there still is great confusion regarding protocol for classroom instructors when an “active shooter” or similar incident occurs on campus. It seems that there should be directions for how to respond, explaining what our responsibilities are during such an occurrence. Perhaps the Buckeye Box folder (see agenda item below) could be used to gather all the questions we feel we should have answers to, and then identify university officials who can respond to those questions. We should start with determining what, if any, university policy/procedures already exist, and then develop a protocol based on that policy and the additional questions we have about it. All our instructors, including TAs, need to be trained on the appropriate responses if another such incident should occur.

The Steering Committee will work to identify university officials to whom we should address our concerns. In the meantime, please feel free identify “best practices” and share them via BuckeyeBox.

Reminder re: link for Buckeye Box folder for Senate meeting documents and other shared information All Senate representatives and alternates have been invited to join. The link is: https://osu.box.com/s/3jw1bm60czc5a5shco34ctxve8pp5kg9

Remaining spring semester meeting dates

March 29 and April 26

Meeting adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 4:53 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Mary Ellen Jenkins

Assistant Executive Dean

College of Arts and Sciences

1