College of Arts & Sciences Curriculum Committee

Meeting of December 14, 2010

3:30-5:00 p.m., BCC 204

Minutes

Present: Mike Andreychik, Bob Epstein, Manyul Im (chair), Jerelyn Johnson, John Miecznikowski, Elizabeth Petrino, Giovanni Ruffini, Les Schaffer, Janet Striuli, Joan Weiss, Qin Zhang

Called to order at 3:34.

1. Announcements:

Chair announced that he would send an e-mail message regarding next semester’s schedule. Among the items for discussion next semester will be to work on a cheat sheet for college faculty members who wish to submit a course proposal. Before the first meeting in February, he plans to inform committee members about schedule regarding review of new course proposals.

Weiss: Has the call gone out?

Chair: No, next time.

Zhang: Will we be discussing the cheat sheet at the first meeting?

Chair: Depending on the need for reviewing proposals, the cheat sheet moves down in the order of the agenda but will be helpful for new course proposers.

2. Approval of Minutes (Meeting of November 9, 2010):

Johnson moves to approve minutes; second, Zhang. Corrections to the minutes followed. Johnson noted that she should be listed as present in meeting. In the discussion of MACS Minimum Grade Requirement Change, she clarified her intention. She asked to have her comment read as follows: “Johnson asked if proposal was born out of frustration in dealing with incorrectly placed students.” Weiss noted that students are already admitted to courses based on their level of preparation.

Miecznikowski offered a correction under “Preliminary Items”: “Next and last meeting:  Dec. 14 if and only if more than cheat sheet is on agenda” should be changed to read “if and only if more than a cheat sheet is on the agenda.”

Motion: Chair called for a vote to approve minutes. Ten approved and minutes passed unanimously.

3. MACS Capstone Modification Proposal:

Chair explained that the proposal was returned to the ASCC with changes that were requested. Miecznikowski asked if there is a capstone required or recommended by the College? Weiss responded that not every major has a capstone. Chair noted that there was a strong recommendation for the capstone for the purpose of assessment and accreditation. He notes that a feedback sheet and catalog description as well as methods for assessing were provided for the MACS Proposal. Ruffini asked if it’s possible to get the degree and not pass the capstone, to which Weiss answered affirmatively.

Motion: Johnson moved to approve the MACS Capstone Modification Proposal ; Miecznikowski seconded.

Chair invited further discussion. Weiss noted that the proposal had already been discussed earlier, unless there were other, new comments to be made. Chair offered that the feedback form looked like a good template for others to follow. Miecznikowski stated that the mission statement for capstone is useful. Ruffini asked about the reasons for a capstone experience. Weiss explained that twenty years ago, in MACS Department could not require a capstone experience for graduation, so a student had to take comprehensive exam. Ruffini further wondered if there is a problem in reasoning—students can graduate and not pass exam. Chair asked what purpose the exam serves for department and institution.

Members of the MACS Department further explained the rationale. Weiss noted that the exam allows students and department to synthesize their knowledge. Striuli noted there must be a point at which students look back at their development. The comprehensive exam allows them to reflect on their progress. Epstein offered that the exam could also be used for internal evaluation. Weiss noted that students can reflect on their knowledge through this exam format.

Schaffer wondered why exam and not a project. Weiss explained that, although there was only one capstone exam in the college, there was a great deal of support for the idea when it was developed. In Mathematics it makes sense to have a comprehensive exam. The exam gives students an opportunity to reflect on eight courses and review them and the skills they have learned. As the exam has been in place for twenty years, Striuli contended that the format will not change. Zhang asked about the number of students talking the exam on a yearly basis. Weiss responded 20-25 students a year; students can retake the exam in April if they fail. Ruffini asked how many capstone experiences are able to be failed. Johnson noted that a student can fail the course in other majors, but pass, but in mathematics, can fail the exam and still graduate.

Other questions centered on the type of exam format. Weiss noted that the comprehensive exam is three-hours long with 5 sections – students need to answer questions from each section – typically, the professors who have taught this section will make up the questions on exam. They are more reflective, less purely quantitative.

Chair noted that MACS Department is undergoing a review which may lead to more discussion in near future. Weiss added that the proposal includes the colloquium as part of the capstone experience. Petrino noted that the mission statement and colloquium objectives are good and encourage increased community among students. Andreychik also stated that interesting information is included that would help toward assessment. Striuli noted that MACS Department discussed the idea of portfolio as a form of assessment. Weiss stated that the Class of 2015 will be the first to become part of capstone experience.

Chair called for a vote on previously stated motion. 9 in favor, 1 abstention.

4. Anthropology Minor Program Proposal:

Chair introduced the proposal. Epstein asked whether there was discussion of minor in either set of minutes presented. Weiss noted it would be good to have a representative of department present the minor. Chair explained that Professor David Crawford, with whom he had spoken previously about this proposal, believes these are the only places where the minor is discussed. Epstein believed there should be minutes of the department’s approval. Johnson noted that there was some discussion of process but little substantive discussion of the minor itself. Epstein contended that the approval of the program should not be controversial, but that minutes were required. Chair agreed that the ASCC needs department approval and minutes as well as catalog copy before its discussion.

Further discussion ensured about how credits were to be counted toward a new minor in Anthropology. Weiss asked if one could as a Sociology major also double count courses toward an Anthropology minor. Qin wondered about the effect of minoring in Anthropology minor on the social science core. Do they double count toward the minor?

Epstein asked if the Sociology and Anthropology Department is ready to propose an Anthropology major. Is this a staffing issue? How would this be formalized? Committee members further questioned whether there should be a distinction between being a Sociology major and Anthropology minor and how many courses can be used toward the Sociology major and a Anthropology minor. Ruffini asked if JOR excerpts were generated by the chair of ASCC, to which Chair responded affirmatively. In discussing another department’s experience, Epstein explained that in English, we can have concentrations within the major in which students apply courses toward a minor course of study. Ruffini asked about the double-dipping solution that x number of courses can be taken outside the major. Johnson offered that students who are majors who wish a minor in Anthropology might need to take extra courses. Miecznikowski asked how the Department decided on these two courses and believed they should include rationale of choice between physical and cultural anthropology. Epstein responded that the courses reflected that expertise of the anthropologists on staff.

Chair responded that he would communicate the desire of the ASCC for more substantive discussion with minutes from a departmental meeting before bringing the issue again for discussion.

Motion: Move to adjourn by Miecznikowski; second, Ruffini.

Meeting adjourned at 4:14 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Elizabeth Petrino