Arts and Science CC

Minutes if the meeting on 9/28/10 (Draft)

Present: Professors Joan Weiss, Jerelyn Johnson, Mayul Im, John Miecznikowski, Les Scheffer, Ain Zhang, Marie Agnes Sourieau, Elizabeth Petrino, Bob Epstein, Janet Striuli (minutes taker), Mike Andreychik.

The Chair calls the meeting was called to order at 3:30pm.

The Chair calls the attention on International Studies/Politics/Women’s studies, PO 136/IL 151 Gender, War, Peace. Miecznikowski moves to approve the course and Sourieau seconds the motion. Im reports on a comment from Giovanni Ruffini who points out on a little unbalance between the three pages essays, which are worth 20% of the total grade, and a fifteen pages essay which is worth 30% of the total Grade. Ain notices that the proposal says nothing about participation policy or attendance. Im adds that the difference among the essays is a little odd but that perhaps that’s justified by the fact that the case studies are more complicated. Miecznikowski would like to see more details for the three pages paper. Epstein adds that the difference on the weight is a little bit weird but the requirements seem very rigorous, and that at this point a syllabus is not required. Im adds that in any case the committee needs to make sure that the proposals fill in the details and in this case the committee perhaps will suggest to add some details to the proposal. Epstein notices that it is really good that the proposal has a plagiarism policy spelled out but it would be better to stick with the student handbook; Johnson agrees. Weiss comments that for multi-listing, the proposal needs to be re-submitted, but the course looks really good despite the fact that some details needs to be added, Johnson agrees. Petrino comments that the proposal makes an effort to make the course really alive with multiple articles and books for discussions.

All in favor to approve the course and no opposed.

Im moves the discussion to the next course: International Studies IL 152 Human Rights. Scheffer moves to approve the proposal and Johnson seconds the motion. Epstein starts the discussion noticing that the proposal was submitted by an adjunct; in fact Johnson says that who submits the proposal is a visiting professor. Weiss asks if there is any regulation about who can submit a proposal. Im adds that there isn’t any regulation against adjuncts to submit new course proposal. Weiss adds that we need to make sure that the course can be taught by other faculty members in the case that if the temporary faculty goes away. Im will send a memo about this concern, and Epstein suggests that we should put this issue as an agenda item for the next meetings, especially, as suggested by Sourieau, if the course is cross-listed. Johnson notices that the course is not cross-listed but it will count towards Peace and Justice. Miecznikowski likes the course assignments and the course readings. Next the conversation moves on what is a “simulation”, a question asked by Scheffer. Im explains that it is a role-playing. He asks if the course is a service-learning course. Weiss answers that it is not, and she notices that the proposal does not answer question 9b. She adds that the course is a really good one but there are a number of issues that need to be addressed. Epstein adds that there are probably some area requirements and the proposal writer will be asked of some clarifications. Im proposed to approve the course with the condition that the department addresses the problem of staff, even if the course proposer will probably stay for a long time. Ain notices that the scheme on the grading is the same as the previous course. Johnson notices that the final should be worth around 30% of the total grade. Petrino amends the motion to be approved with conditions. Johnson seconds and all are in favor with no one against the motion.

Im moves the discussion to the course: Mathematics MA354, Actuarial Problem solving. Miecznikowski moves to approve the course and Ain seconds it. Miecznikowski says that he likes the course and Johnson likes the fact that the course already exists in practice. Im notices that the syllabus should have all the grade range not just an example. Sourieau asks whether the course is an overload for the faculty in the Department of Mathematics and computer science, Weiss answers that as a department we bank the 1 credit course for the professors that teach it, and after all is just one credit.

All the members of the committee are in favor to approve the course.

Im moves the discussion to the next course: Visual and Performing Arts, MU102 History and Development of Rock, and he brings to the attention of the committee that this is a weeklong course. Epstein recalls that there is another form to be submitted.

Im asks if the committee thinks that there are any issues about students having to burn a CD prior to going to class. The committee does not think there is any issue, and Epstein adds that students can do this legally answering a question of Weiss. Epstein notices that on Day 3 the students would have an exam on material they have been taught on the same day, and he thinks that this is not appropriate. Johnson notices that they also do review in the morning. Sourieau comments that this is the problem with all on-week courses. Petrino suggests that the students could have the weekend before the midterm. Miecznikowski notices that also the final has the same problem. Epstein suggests that the test could go over the material covered in the previous days. Im brings to the attention to the committee the issue of the equipment and whether the students will have access to the proper technology. Epstein says that the professor does not need to provide the access to the equipment but he should explain the technology expectation on the syllabus. Miecznikowski says that the Library is provides good support for technology and Epstein says that this should be on the Syllabus. Epstein move to resend the proposal to Brian Troff for re-submission after some reconsideration. Miecznikowski seconds it and the committee votes with an outcome of 9 members in favor of the motion and 1 member against it.

Im moves the discussion to Philosophy PH 204, Philosophy of Language. Miecznikowski moves to approve the course and Petrino seconds it. Epstein comments that this is a crucial course for every philosophy department and Johnson agrees. Ain comments that there are possibly 11 texts but, as Johnson comments, many of them are articles. Ain comments that 10 pages essay are worth 50% of the grade, but Im comments that a synopsis is a very digested process and it is not inappropriate that a synopsis is worth a lot. Petrino adds that this course will complement the course of philosophy of literature and Sourieau adds that it is a lovely course also for modern languages.

The committee proceeds to vote and all its members are in favor of approving the course.

The next course discussed is Politics, PO 148, Political Violence. Im notices that the Word diversity committee will consider the course for approval. Petrino likes the focus on the South-Eat Asia. She thinks that the grading criteria are lacking of details and in particular there are little information about the exams. Weiss suggests that perhaps the details will be hand out later but she expresses concern for the fact that the final and the research papers are due on the same day. But Johnson notices that in fact the research paper is due the last day of class and the final is to be announced. Epstein moves to approve the course, Petrino seconds and all the members of the committee vote in favor.

Im moves the conversation to Politics PO 169, US Environmental Politics and Policy. Petrino moves to approve the course and Ain seconds. Miecznikowski has some comments about the grading, he finds it strange that the midterm and the final have the same amount of material and he notices that the participation should be spelled out in more details. Weiss notices that there is no grade such as D+ or D-. Johnson notices that the in the syllabus is stated that points will be taken off when students will use their cell phones in class, and Im adds that it should be clear how many points do students have to begin with. Andreychik thinks that this is a good balance between explaining what are the policies and leaving some room for flexibility, Im suggests that perhaps the percentages should be clear. Im and Johnson comment that the course is really good and the committee proceeds to vote to the approval of the course with all its members in favor.

The committee discusses the next course: Religion studies, RS 227 Sufism and Islamic Spirituality, Im asks if someone is ready to move the motion to approve the course: Scheffer moves it and Johnson seconds it. Epstein comments that this is an essential course and Im adds that it fits well with the history class. Weiss confirms that the course is really good but the inal paper and the final exam are due the same day and this is not appropriate. Johnson suggests to have the final paper due the last day of class.

All the members of the committee are in favor of approving the course.

The committee now discusses Visual and Performing Art SA 109 Architectural Drawing. Sourieau moves to approve the course and Johnson seconds it, commenting that the course will generate a nice use of the museum. Epstein notices that this is the third architectural course and if there is a bigger plan with the intention of creating a certificate in architecture, this should be commented somewhere. Im adds that this is the plan. Weiss notices that the question 9b is not answered at all. Epstein asks whether those courses will be taught by adjuncts, he notices that this is one of those occasions where the university should hire Professors of practice and have them teaching the course. Johnson raises the question about the attendance policy outside the class. Sourieau comments that for visual arts the students should commit to go to museums or to trips outside campus. Petrino adds that the policy for out-of-classes events could be clarified. Weiss notices that there are a lot of field sketching and asks if it is a requirement. Epstein answers that the field sketching is announced in the course description as a requirement. Weiss adds that the syllabus should say that class trips are not an excuse for missing other classes. Class events are treated differently from University events and faculty requiring class trips should clarify it to students. Petrino suggests that the new faculty, who submitted the proposal for the new course, would consult with other professors on how to present the requirements to the students. Im raises issues on whether the department can support the course with the appropriate staffing resources. Petrino amends the motion so as to add the requirement that the department would reflect on the staffing issues and answer 9b and we approve conditionally the course. Epstein seconds the amendment and all the members of the committee are in favor.

For the last class Theatre/New Media, TA 231/FM 133 Acting for the Camera. Johnson notices that there is a typo on the first page of the form with the name of the course. Epstein moves to approve the course and Weiss seconds it. Johnson comments that this is a good class, much needed at Fairfield in order to point out the differences between stage acting and film acting. Ain notices that the syllabus is on a 13 weeks schedule. Weiss comments that a lot of the work of the professor presenting the proposal has been really good. All the members of the committee vote in favor for the approval of the course

Im says that among the next agenda items of the committee there is the 5 years program review for the department of new media and film. Weiss points out that the guidelines for the review are available on Eidos but the everything will be sent via email. Epstein moves to adjourn and Johnson seconds it.

The committee adjourns.

Respectfully Submitted,

Janet Striuli (Secretary pro tempore)