Arts & Sciences Curriculum Committee (ASCC)

February 10, 2009

 

Present: Robbin Crabtree, Bop Epstein, Joan Weiss, Jim Shanahan (Chair), John Miecznikowski, Manyul Im, Jessica Davis; Shannon Harding, Danke Li, Maggie Wills, Michael Pagano

 

Absent: None

 

Meeting called to order by Shanahan @ 3:30 pm

 

Approval of the minutes from December 15, 2008

 

With minor changes suggested by Shanahan:

 

p. 4, par. 4:  change "a useful" to "useful"
p. 4, par. 4: lower case for "Culture", "Politics" and "Economic Melt-down"
p. 6, par. 1: change "OPS different" to "OPS is different"
P. 6, par. 1: change "talk in a language" to "talk in a foreign language"

 

Motion to approve – Harding made the motion and Davis seconded

 

Vote = Approve = 6, Reject = 0, Abstain = 5

 

Crabtree discussed how A&S is developing periodic peer review of all programs in the College, some had processes, others did not. She put together a task force to work on it.

 

Task force has been collecting program review documents from other institutions and associations. Task force is currently working on a draft of processes. But Crabtree proposed electing 2 members of ASCC to serve on the task force as it moves forward on its work on program reviews in the College.

 

Davis suggested one elected member be from Humanities and one from Science. Crabtree proposed that Weiss be one of those elected.

 

Epstein asked how current members of the task force were selected. Crabtree said they were appointed by Chairs, but there were none from science and that was why she suggested Weiss.

 

Crabtree feels document needs to live in ASCC and in Crabtree's office. Current draft is based on Santa Clara structure and more advising than directive in tone. Disciplinary guidelines are expected to advise disciplines how to leverage this type of review.

 

Crabtree mentioned that College Planning Committee has commented on draft, but she feels that it is also an ASCC issue.

 

Crabtree thinks one more meeting of task force is needed to revise and approve draft before coming to ASCC for evaluation/approval.

 

Shanahan moved to vote on whether ASCC wanted to elect 2 members to Task Force. Epstein seconded the motion.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval of electing 2 members from ASCC to serve on task force

 

Davis nominated Miecznikowski, Im seconded.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval

 

Crabtree nominated Weiss, Epstein seconded

 

Vote = Unanimous approval.

 

Congratulations were extended to Miecznikowski & Weiss and Shanahan said the committee would look forward to their report.

 

Crabtree asked Shanahan to hold space on March 17^th meeting for possible presentation of draft to ASCC. Shanahan agreed.

 

 

Course Reviews

 

AN 152 - "The City and Modern China"

 

Im made a motion to approve, Weiss seconded.

 

Im noted that this course had been approved for World Diversity if approved by ASCC.

 

Davis noted the course seemed to be heavily relying on films and she was concerned about trends in similar Modern Language courses. Davis was concerned that it could impact students' perceptions of the major/minor. Li pointed out that film studies were also an area of Xiao's specialty.

 

Davis raised the issue of a lack of responses, or unclear responses being frequently submitted for Question 9 on the new course proposal form and how it relates to the teaching load in the Department. Li noted that this was an Asian Language course and that Xiao was trying to get approval for cross-listing with Film Studies program. Epstein and Li discussed why it wasn't being cross-listed with English Department. Epstein pointed out that the English Dept. needed a better system to get courses cross-listed.

 

Crabtree agreed with Davis' concern related to how courses are impacting other courses in the curriculum, resources, adjuncts, etc. and thus question 9 should be addressed better in all proposals.

 

Epstein wanted to see more collaboration with cross-listing, but he'd have some questions about requirements and grades. Perhaps English and Modern Languages should have a conversation down the road.

 

Also Davis voiced concern that it didn't appear too many of the projects in the course are graded written reports.

Shanahan suggested that if the course were approved he would suggest that the course include more written/graded work and more specificity about final projects (parameters, etc.).

 

Vote = Unanimous approval

 

BI 318 & BI 318L "Vertebrate Zoology and Vertebrate Zoology Lab"

 

Epstein made motion to approve, Miecznikowski seconded motion

 

Miecznikowski pointed out there was no listing for Week #14 on the course schedule

 

Davis questioned statement regarding "second unexcused absence will result in failure" seems to be not part of University policy. Discussion followed about University policies regarding absenteeism.

 

Im was concerned about response to 7b and wondered if course would be approved as interdisciplinary by Latin and Caribbean Studies. Shanahan pointed out that he had no letter from them, so it should not be considered as part of the course approval process. Li asked if trip would be ongoing for future courses. Harding asked if it was appropriate to have "exciting" in course description. Shanahan suggested he collect wording suggestions and pass on to professor, since it was a draft.

 

Epstein and Davis raised questions about the travel associated with the lab component and if it was required. Miecznikowski pointed out that travel was optional and would be done over winter break/spring. Crabtree asked if ASCC should assume Department had done due diligence in recommending the courses.

 

Epstein pointed out that Latin & Caribbean Studies would have more knowledge about travel issues. Shanahan suggested he contact professor to get more clarification. Crabtree asked if BI 318 could be approved and committee request more clarification on BI 318L? Epstein asked if students would go all the way to Argentina for only 2 credits? Discussion ensued about costs for travel, etc. and Shanahan pointed out that the Department minutes described how they hoped to keep travel costs under $2,000.

 

Harding felt more information was needed for approval of BI 318L. Im suggested committee be more expressive and detailed about what it felt was missing from proposal. Miecznikowski wanted to know what students would be doing in Argentina. Epstein wanted to know how long they would be there. Discussion ensued about whether students could register for BI 318L without going to Argentina.

 

Miecznikowski moved to revise motion to only approve BI 318, Harding seconded.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval of BI 318, and to recommend resubmission with revisions of BI 318L.

 

 

EV 301 – "Environment Workshop/Capstone"

 

Im moved to approve course, Wills seconded for approval.

 

Crabtree commended thoroughness of application. Miecznikowski liked goals for each session. Li pointed out that it was planned for each year and were there enough minors to support this frequency. Crabtree pointed out it was growing and Shanahan suggested without this course it would be hard for the program to continue to grow.

 

Wills noted that Catalog Description is well over 100 word limit. She suggested they remove prerequisites to meet criteria.

 

Davis pointed out that there is a lot of work that is due every week and it seemed like a lot of work for the professor.

 

Harding pointed out that 50% of grade is on the last day or two of the class, and she wasn't suggesting disapproving, but might want to make more incremental. Shanahan said this was not uncommon in Capstone courses, but he would suggest making more incremental.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval

 

IT 233 – "Italian Creative Writing"

 

Im made motion to approve course, Miecznikowski seconded.

 

Epstein asked if Naitana is a Visiting Professor and will he be here to teach this course again? Epstein wondered if not, should the course be listed as a special topics course? Shanahan said the Department minutes do not reflect concern over who would teach this course if the visiting line is not renewed.

Crabtree pointed out that DMLL uses a lot of adjuncts. Epstein was concerned about a course proposed by an adjunct being unusual, especially if future adjuncts do not want to teach the course. Li pointed out that it can create confusion for students when the faculty who proposed courses are no longer teaching them and students see them in the catalog and then they plan their future registration based on the course in the catalog.

 

Im pointed out that it should be special topics and Harding asked if special topics courses were a possibility in Modern Languages curriculum because they are not available in every discipline. Weiss said Modern Languages does not have special topic course offerings.

 

Miecznikowski asked if ASCC could give one-time approval. Crabtree suggested that one-time approval should be reserved for newly hired faculty who are not on campus yet.

 

Epstein moved to revise motion to approve to be approval pending Crabtree's ascertaining whether there are faculty resources to teach the course. Revised motion was seconded by Li

 

Vote = Unanimous approval of revised motion.

 

 

SP 115 & SP 215 – "Intensive Elementary Spanish & Intensive Intermediate Spanish"

 

Im made motion to approve, Harding seconded.

 

Im asked who crossed out on item 11 on IT 215, Miecznikowski pointed out it was restated on back of form. Epstein asked who this course was intended for and discussion ensued about the fact that this was designed primarily for highly motivated students who want to complete language requirement in one year.

 

For effective review, Miecznikowski suggested everything in course proposal including syllabus should be in English, since not all committee members speak Spanish. Im also suggested that, for committees, syllabus should be in English. Shanahan pointed out that there is no requirement to submit a syllabus, but just to answer the proposal questionnaire, so the committee can't require them to submit in English.

 

Im asked if committee could send a recommendation to Modern Languages Department Chair that all materials submitted to the committee be in English (a reviewer's version).

 

Shanahan said he would ask.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval of both SP 115 & SP 215.

 

 

SP 208 – "Intermediate Spanish for Health Professionals"

 

Wills made motion to approve, seconded by Davis

 

Davis pointed out not syllabus not in English

 

Epstein asked if there isn't already a Health Professions Spanish course.

 

Crabtree suggested we ask them to clarify prerequisites, Weiss explained the professor was indicating that the proposed course was an intermediate level offering and it required elementary Spanish as a prerequisite.

 

Harding pointed out catalog description is over 110 words

 

Weiss noted that there is a "Career Oriented Spanish" already in the catalog, so that course should be removed from the catalog and replaced with this one if approved.

 

Discussion ensued about potential students for this course and if they take it and they are not in nursing, can they then take SP 212 to finish their Spanish requirement? Is it equivalent to SP 210 and therefore they can take SP 211 to complete the requirement? Or should they be required to take SP 210 before this course? It was pointed out that proposal states that SP 208 covers the same skills as 210.

 

Crabtree noted there is a core curriculum scenario here and they need to clarify.

 

Epstein recommended the committee pass SP 208, but recommend they clarify in course description and syllabus. Crabtree suggested that the revisions need to be VERY CLEAR in the course description. Crabtree reiterated the need for everyone to know the proper order for courses to fulfill the requirement. Specifically, Crabtree felt everyone needed to know how SP 208 fits into the two semesters at intermediate level curriculum.

 

Shanahan said he would communicate the committee's concern to the professor.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval.

 

 

SP 363 – "Literature and Culture of the Hispanic Caribbean Migration and Diaspora"

 

Motion to approve by Harding, Weiss seconded

 

No discussion

 

Vote = Unanimous approval

RS 256 - "Religious Diversity in Early Judaism and Christianity"

 

Epstein made motion to approve, seconded by Harding

 

No discussion, except Harding pointed out that no D+ grade exists at Fairfield.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval.

 

 

SO 188 – "Contemporary Latin American and Caribbean Society"

 

Shanahan pointed out that there was a wrong number SO 192 on proposal.

 

Im made motion to approve, Li seconded.

 

Davis noted that the professor didn't answer question 9b

 

Shanahan suggested ASCC should send notes to Chairs to increase completion rate of question 9b on all future proposals. Shanahan will communicate to Chairs need to address ALL proposal questions in future submissions.

 

Davis recommended not taking out the final exam as suggested in accompanying letter from Sourieau.

 

Vote = Unanimous approval.

 

 

Meeting was adjourned at 5:00 PM due to consensual departure.