College of Arts & Sciences
Curriculum Committee Meeting
April 13, 2010
Present: Shannon
Harding, Manyul Im, Danke Li, Elizabeth Petrino,Vin Rosavich, David Sapp, Les Schaffer, Roxana Walker-Canton,
Joan Weiss, Qin Zhang
Guest Present: Gisela Gil-Egui, co-director Latin American and Caribbean Studies (LACS)
program
Absent: Bob Epstein
(excused), Jessica Davis (excused)É
Meeting was called to
order at 3:30 pm in BCC 204.
1. Announcements
Harding: Potential
May meeting: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 3:30-5:00pm
2. Approval of the minutes
from the ASCC March 16, 2010 meeting
Vote:
5 approve, 1 abstention
3. Rewording item 9b on the
course proposal form
Info: – two
typos noted by Harding and Rosavich to be corrected;
Harding – is an announcement necessary? Rosavich
– maybe a simple announcement; Harding – seems like a good revision
Motion to approve
revision as corrected: Sapp, second Zhang; seven approved (unanimous)
4. New course proposal:
LACS 399 Independent Study
Info: Harding
– Sabo informed Harding that this course had not been approved, so
one-time approval was granted by Dean; proposal is now available for approval
Motion to approve: Rosavich, Schaffer second
Discussion: Sapp
– apropos 9b, there is an existing practice in departments for accumulating
credit for independent studies, though IDPs do not;
but isnÕt there a way to use the department practices to get the credit,
through departmental approval? Li – a similar problem occurs in Asian
Studies, but the departments donÕt always (History, e.g.) approve AN
independent studies for departmental purposes; Rosavich
– maybe we could form a subcommittee to look into the matter; Harding and
Sapp – weÕve already been through this process; Rosavich
– problem exists in a lot of IDPs; Li –
it needs addressing at a serious level; Sapp – the proposer of LACS 399
should open a dialogue with her department about possibility of compensation so
that approval of this course does not set the precedent for no compensation
ever for this course; Sapp – College policy is that 20 independent
studies earns a course release; Harding – the number Ō20Õ was negotiated
out of the policy so that there is more flexibility; Shaffer – why are
independent studies in IDPs different, i.e. not
counted for credit toward accumulation for compensation; Sapp – chair of
ASCC should recommend to the proposer that if she wishes to explore issues of
compensation, she should consult chair of her department; called motion to
question, seconded by Rosavice; unanimous approval
Vote: 8 in favor, 1 absention
5. Changes to the Minor
in LACS
Informational
session with invited guest present: Gisela Gil-Egui, co-director LACS; Gil-Egui
– minor was too diluted, so language courses were removed and course
addition was added; Weiss – proposal makes the workload extensive;
proposal was difficult to figure out; what are the 18 credits going to be? Dean
and Weiss were concerned with 18 credits of ŅrealÓ courses—why not have
fewer alternative experiences count? Gil-Egui –
internships count and are important and newly created independent study will
also count and be potentially valuable; Weiss – will increase make
recruitment for the minor more difficult? Gil-Egui – this was discussed
in program meeting, but the substantive increase seemed important for pedagogy
and more coordinated and better recruitment plan with IS will likely offset it;
also, long-term plans for inclusion of Latino studies will also help in the
future; Sapp – how many interns typically per year and who is in charge
of them? Gil-Egui – typically 2, Brian Walker is usually in charge of the
internships; Sapp – are you sure you want us to approve an 18 credit
minor? Gil-Egui – the wishes of the faculty in the program are clear and
definite, even though there is a risk of recruitment drops because we are
committed to new more effective strategies of recruitment; Rosavich
– the routing of the proposal needs to go through the ASCC, then the
DeanÕs office, then the UCC; Sapp and Im – the
next meeting of UCC is in May, past the Catalog deadline for the changes, so it
will not be possible to go through approval process for next year.
Motion to approve
– Rosavich; Sapp second
Discussion –
Harding – steering committee has put thought into the proposal and we
should look upon the proposal positively; Sapp – the program has strong
leadership in GilEgui and Walker, and the faculty are
committed, so the proposal should be looked upon favorably; Li – IÕd like
to respect the steering committeeÕs decisions based on their expertise; Petrino – it is an attempt to make the program more
rigorous so it should be looked upon favorably; Rosavich
– we should respect the expertise and decisions of the people who are
directly involved with the program and approve the changes as recommended by
the steering committee; Shaffer – I support the motion; Weiss – I
support the motion but have concerns about the increase in credits which seems
less than rational for the goal of increasing rigor, given the recruitment
risks and the extra workload potential for the faculty; Zhang – I support
the motion and we should respect the expertise of the steering committee.
Vote: 8 (unanimous)
approve
6. Oversight of certificate
programs offered in the college
Information: Harding
received an email from Jill Deupi about certificate
programs—who is eligible and who oversees the process. Weiss –
policy for oversight process in College programs was issued last year by the
committee: departmental approval, ASCC approval, then deanÕs approval; Sapp
– courses offered in College, but all certificates are given by UC, which
is not really under our purview; itÕs a marketing strategy used by UC; Weiss
– some certificates are offered by departments within the college (e.g.
in Mathematics); Im – if it isnÕt a certificate
offered by a department in the college, itÕs not under our purview; Harding
– the question should go to Edna Wilson, the dean of UC.
Submitted by Manyul
Im