Ramapo College of New Jersey

General Education Curriculum Committee (GECCo)

Meeting Minutes for Wednesday, October 27, 2010

1:00 P.M. – 2:30 P.M.

Venue: ASB-230

Members present: Monika Giacoppe (AIS), Clyde Johnson (TAS), Leigh Keller (Library), Donovan McFeron (TAS), Rob Mentore (TAS), Sam Mustafa (AIS), Nick Salter (SSHS), Beba Shamash (CA), Gladys Torres-Baumgarten (ASB), Jim Woodley (ASB, Ex-Officio), Don Fucci (AIS), Rick Nunez (ASB), Eric Daffron (Provost’s Office)

Absent: Meredith Davis (CA), Emma Rainforth (TAS, Ex-Officio), Ashwani Vasishth (SSHS)

  1. Discussed, Amended and Approved Minutes.
    The amended minutes from October 6, 2010 were approved.
  2. Discussion of Responses to Letters to Faculty:
    Committee members reported that personally contacting the faculty worked best.
  3. GECCo Chair Issue:
    A motion was passed that Rob Mentore will remain the sole chair of GECCO.
  4. Discussion of Subcommittees:
    Rob Mentore suggested that GECCO should establish subcommittees of 4-6 members to expedite committee tasks. The subcommittees will meet separately in addition to GECCo meetings. Some members raised concerns over the number of meetings. Jim Woodleyreiterated that subcommittees should help us assess Gen. Ed.more quickly.
    Sam Mustafa mentioned that FAEC has found that there are 70 all-college committees, and he does not think that we should add 4 more committees. He also suggested that the convening groups could be doing what GECCo is trying to do, and some debate over that ensued.Nick Salter and Beba Shamash suggested combining the subcommittees on Student Learning Outcomes and Curriculum Mapping. The members present agreed to combine these two subcommittees,change the AAC&U subcommittee to a presentation group, and add a writing assessment subcommittee.
  5. Discussion of Assessment
    Clyde Johnson feels that the writing assessment we are doing is a pilot. Eventually he envisions collecting a writing sample from every student at Ramapo each semester. He also expressed some reservations about the scientific process of our assessment. Rick Nunezlikened the writing assessment process to an entrepreneurial enterprise and is comfortable with the direction of the committee.Monika Giacoppe raised concerns over not assessing the writing of transfer students.
    Eric Daffron feels that for programmatic assessment of Gen. Ed., we are looking at what a student can do when the Gen. Ed. program is finished. We want to answer the question, “Are our students able to write at the Gen. Ed. level?” Analysis of writing sample can be viewed by category and by course level. We might be able to determine if more writing should be required in the curriculum or if more writing-intensive courses should be developed.
    We then discussed which outcomes to assess in the spring. Monika Giacoppe and Jim Woodley feel that we should finish assessing writing before beginning to assess other outcomes.
  6. Discussion on Ethics
    Jim Woodley would like to have a coherent plan in place that deals with ethics related to assessment, e.g.,how to protect students and faculty members from harm that could result from the assessment process, and how to engage with our peers when seeking their participation. Rick Nunez thinks that it might be sufficient to keep track of decisions made as ethical issues arise. Then generalize those decisions so that they are applicable in other situations.

Minutes submitted by Donovan McFeron, 2010-10-27.