University Curriculum Committee - March 1, 2012 meetingminutes

Approved: 3-8-12

Attending: Christine Smith, Melissa Boog, Ledesa Eddins, Emily Story, Victoria Hook, Jonathan Colon, Dave Parker, Mike Folkoff, Jackie Maisel, Ed Robeck, Katherine Miller (recorder)

Absent: Fatollah Salimian

Minutes- Feb 9, 2012 - Approved

Feb 23, 2012 - Approved

Old business

Packet 30: formatting of UMES class listings updated to match SU.

Approved

Packet 35 - remaining tabled pending a signature from TEC

Packet 36 - Discussion:

- INFO 401 - originally indicated it was repeatable for more credit, this was removed, now also includes library resource communication.

- INFO 211 - Discussion of wording for prerequities for INFO 211 on checklist to make language clearer. Committee decided to leave this issue to the department.

Approved

Packet 37 - Discussion:

- Ed asked Keith to send packet to school curriculum committees.

- Discussion about whether UCC was the appropriate venue for a discussion of changing the requirements of the B.A. degree and whether it should be addressed by the faculty as a whole.

Packet remains tabled.

Packet 40- Discussion:

-committee received information from social work about course rotation over the next several semesters.

Approved

NEW Business:

Packet 41 - Discussion:

-Needs communication from chemistry.

-Resource analysis is incomplete...needs statement about the staffing implications for all departments affected especially chemistry.

- Discussion about how much do resources play into UCC decisions. Should pay attention to make sure that due diligence had been performed to collect information on resource issues and how these issues may impact time to completion.

-No paperwork to convert ATTR 380 to 280. Needs course change proposal.

- For individual pieces, each course change needs to have old number at top. Not new number

- Discussion about what course enhancements means in terms of UCC packets and the appropriate paperwork necessary to document enhancements. Also, course enhancements from three to four credits was a Fulton initiative. Does this now apply to all other schools? Committee split on view of this.

-Enhancements had to be spelled out and explained. Discussion about what standard should be used to determine a course is three or four credits. New four credit class vs converting a three credit to four credit.

- Committee decided that any such change from 3 to 4 credits or the proposal of a new 4 credit course must be justified in terms of COMAR policies.

-In this packet, committee agreed that enhancement language was inappropriate.

-For ATTR 320 and 321, discussion about whether show historical vs current content.

- Need to check and add appropriate activity codes.

Packet tabled

General Education Assessment in new proposals ...presented by Melissa Boog

Outcomes for generaleducation have been passed by senate. For new class proposals, check sheets for how the new courses meet that area's outcomes have been created and will be inserted into the curriculum approval guide.

Math 150will be coming through as a general education class. Math is concerned about controlling the enrollment in a class designed for education majors. Math is working out the issue. The packet should be coming in a few weeks.

Next meeting: March 8, 2012

Adjourned at 5:00 pm

Summary of actions taken on March 1, 2012

Approved / Tabled
February 9 minutes / Packet 35
February 23 minutes / Packet 37
Packet 30 / Packet 41
Packet 36
Packet 40