Mason Core Committee

February 11, 2014

12:00 – 1:30 p.m., Mason Hall, D1

Attending:Janette Muir (Chair), Melissa Broeckelman-Post,Rick Diecchio,Kelly Dunne,Kim Eby, Becky Ericson,Doug Eyman, Marcy Glover, Stephanie Hazel, Mack Holt,Frank Allen Philpot,Mark Uhen,Carol Urban,Peter Winant

Out: Dominique Banville, Peter Kleine

Note:Roger Paden has resigned from the committee. Janette has asked Faculty Senate to appoint a replacement member.

Updates- Faculty Senate

  • Janette reported on her second visit to the Faculty Senate. There are several concerns she has been asked to address. The final decision was to send the proposal back to the Mason Core committee for further review.
  • Before she prepares her response, Janette asked the committee if they wish to continue pursuing this change or do they want to move in another direction? After general discussion, the decision was made to continue with the synthesis to capstone change.
  • Suzanne Slayden had 5 issues she felt needed further explanation before this matter can be resolved. These questions will be sent to Janette for her response, which she will share with the committee before submitting them to the Faculty Senate.
  • Janette asked everyone to speak to their chairs and fellow faculty members to explain the proposal and answer any questions/concerns they may have.
  • One issue that has been raised is that there is concern on how to address or incorporate a “pressing societal concerns” in certain types of courses.
  • Possible suggestions on how to meet the capstone: bridge from the sophomore to junior year, or to have the capstone be the culminating experience of one of the pathways.
  • Would it be easier to understand/conceptualize/accept, if we used a different term than capstone?
  • There was consensus that there is a significant amount of misinformation about this change, which is leading to the difficulties in getting the proposal passed. We need to create an educational campaign to explain why are recommending the change and what is really means to the faculty.
  • A Frequently Asked Questions flyer will be created and posted on our web page, as well as circulated.
  • Other areas of concerns overheard have been: the 85 hour rule and the class size issue (is this an unfunded mandate?)
  • Are we contradicting ourselves? We say there are no learning outcomes, but there are learning outcomes in the proposal. Is it a culminating experience in the major or the program? The department decides; but it is not in the major.

ARTH 370 - ARTS - APPROVED

No discussion was necessary.

CS 100 – IT, all – APPROVED

No discussion was necessary.

Synthesis courses are still tabled.

Assessment Update – Stephanie Hazel

Stephanie, Kim and Janette will be attending a conference in Portland in late February on General Education trends.

Stephanie needs volunteers for portfolio review: Oral Communication and Natural Science (in March) and again in May for Written Communication.

Discussion for Next Meeting(s)

  • Review of outstanding courses
  • Begin mapping of pathways
  • IT – revisit this requirement; remove ethics component? Change focus to digital literacy?
  • Global experience for all – what does that mean, how is it implemented?