2017_02_14_ASCC

In attendance: Steven Bayne, Jocelyn Boryczka, Ryan Drake, Johanna Garvey, David McFadden, Margaret McClure, Laura McSweeney, Laura Nash, Giovanni Ruffini (Chair), Jaqueline Vernarelli

Motion: Margaret McClure moves to approve; David McFadden seconds

Vote: 6 in favor, 3 abstentions. Motion passes unanimously

The agenda circulated has a list of actions taken by the chair. The first five of them do not require an explanation; Chair Ruffini is happy to provide clarification if necessary.

Ruffini states the Governance Document grants the Chair the ability to make these changes. However, the Committee has the right to review them if they do not like them.

· Bayne - Shocked that the History Department no longer has 200 level requirements for 300 level courses.

· McFadden – The department wants to increase the number of students and keep the same quality.

· Boryczka - Politics does not have prerequisites for upper level courses. As they are not required within the core, they need to pitch courses in certain ways for enrollment reasons.

· Ruffini – Enrollment concerns are a factor because they are getting to the point where they cannot teach these specialty courses.

· Ruffini - Was asked to approve the following name change for PY 332 from Special Issues in Women’s Mental Health to Current Issues in Clinical Psychology Senior Seminar.

· McClure – When she proposed her seminar she wanted to focus on Gender Studies, however, there is no psychology course that is cross listed with Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies. Her department felt that a senior seminar was not an appropriate course for such a cross listing. She has proposed a 200 level course that will be cross listed with WGSS. There is no need for two women’s mental health courses in the department. Her thought was to remove the gender focus from her senior seminar, bringing it more in line with other senior seminars within the department. The idea being that they would always discuss the most current issues in their specialty areas. She would like to add “senior seminar “to the title.

o Structure, grading and requirements will be the same – based on primary source articles.

· Jocelyn Boryczka – This is her area of specialty, not only in terms of her training, but also in terms of her professional work. She brings both to the course. Students in the MPA course and in the Politics’ major have been crying out for courses in the state and local. It fills a need, here in the university, as well.

· Steven Bayne – Should recommend the attendance policy on the syllabus. The statement on plagiarism is inconsistent. They should go with the first statement not the second. The first one is correct.

· McFadden – Committee needs to know what the differences are between the two courses because a graduate course should have a much higher level of difficulty.

· Drake – Concerned of how the syllabus states the Final = 30%, then right after that: Final Exam is worth 25 percent of the overall grade.

Motion: Nash moves it should be sent back for clarification and more details, an attendance policy, a grading policy and how it relates to PO 190. The Committee needs to see this again. McFadden seconds

Vote: All in favor

Motion: Steven Bayne moves to approve; Laura McSweeney seconds

· McFadden – This is a course taught in Italian, organized as a way to get students excited about Italy, why isn’t this taught in English?

· Nash – Troubled by the course because none of the areas are Professor Carolyn’s area of expertise.

· Ryan Drake – It is broken into some interesting movements that have intellectual content.

Motion: Ryan Drake moves to approve; Steven Bayne seconds

Vote: 5 in favor, 3 opposed, 1 abstention

Motion: Margaret McClure moves to approve; Jaqueline Vernarelli seconds

· Steven Bayne – The number of weeks is incorrect, 15 weeks is wrong. This must be adjusted. The attendance policy doesn’t reflect the Journal of Record’s requirements that students have release time for athletic or university sponsored events.

· Jackie Vernarelli – Regarding the attendance policy - do they mean the final average is reduced by 2.5% points or is it the final grade, which is out of 300 something points? That is a pretty big difference.

Vote: All in favor of a Conditional Approval: (1.change to 14 weeks; 2. modify the attendance policy; 3. change bullet on page 3)

Motion: David McFadden moves to approve; Margaret McClure seconds.

· Jocelyn Boryczka - The last page still has the requirements for sending this to this Committee; that part can be deleted.

Vote: 8 in favor: 1 abstention; motion passes

Motion: Johanna Garvey moves to approve; David McFadden seconds

· Laura McSweeney – This is a 2 ½ hour lecture every week. In terms of the problem sets, there might be some flexibility. They are usually due every other week because the students are working.

o The 531 and 532 courses will be reconfigured so that we will have an Intro Differential Equations course that students coming into the program will take as a 400 level course. The 531 and 532 will alternate as electives for the grad students.

· McFadden - This should be retitled. It should be Byzantine Orthodox. It is not Orthodox Christianity; it never comes to the present.

· McSweeney – This needs to answer all the questions. It is going to replace courses.

Motion: David McFadden motions to resubmit for clarification; Jaqueline Vernarelli seconds

Vote: 8 in favor; 1 opposed

Ruffini - Feels like he needs to ask for clarification for RS 290 and for MPA 450. As the professors are presumably offering them in the fall, are we asking them not to submit these courses?

Nash – If the course isn’t approved, they can’t submit it. They can get added to the addendum later.

Motion: Laura McSweeney moves to approve; David McFadden seconds

· Boryczka – PO 165 should have been officially renamed because Gwen Alphonso teaches the Political Parties course which is more historically orientated. PO 165 is renamed (or should be renamed) Political Parties. Gale does Quantitative Analysis. Gwen’s approach is American Political development. PO 172 is her area of expertise.

· Ruffini – P0 165 will be appearing on the March agenda under the Note of actions taken by the chair.

Vote: All in favor of a Conditional Approval (1. Clarification on take home exams 2. Plagiarism inconsistency 3. Time stamp)

Motion: David McFadden moves to approve; Jaqueline Vernarelli seconds

· McFadden – Thought it was a terrific course; the best evidence for this was the minutes of the WGSS.

· McClure - It will be one of the electives offered in the psychology department, typically offered every other year.

· Bayne – Would you consider separating course goals and outcomes? McClure would consider that.

Vote: 8 in favor; 1 abstention

Bayne – In the minutes, it says that there is no process in the department program of approval that is being handled in the journal of record. That is false; at the very least the Journal of Record requires two levels of faculty review. There is no word certificate in the JOR. It can be sent back and ask for a program proposal. It has to go through the process.

McSweeney – May want to put a definition of certificate program in page 46 in the Journal of Record.

Motion: Reject proposal and ask to resubmit following new program proposal guidelines.

McSweeney moves to approve; McFadden seconds.

Vote: All in favor

Motion: Ask Academic Council to amend the Journal of Record where appropriate to include reference to certificates in addition to programs.

Vernarelli moves to approve; McSweeney seconds.

Vote: All in favor

McFadden – Is it customary to create minors that are that focused as compared to concentrations? A concentration seems more appropriate. I thought a minor was a minor in a broad field. In all of our fields there are majors and minors, but we don’t subdivide them like that. The department should take a look at what they are covering.

Boryczka – It is really confusing. They could potentially have an inter-department minor, but they are not doing that at this point. They could have a major in Religious Studies, a minor in Religious Studies and a minor in Religion in America. I don’t know of any department that has ever done that.

Bayne – It’s not a Religious Studies minor. If departments want their students to be recognized by this specific course of study, I’m not exactly seeing the problem.

McFadden – Concentration seems appropriate. The department should take a look at what they are covering.

Vernarelli – We have several concentrations in Biology. The real difference between a minor and a concentration is the capstone course, a 4 course concentration or a 5 course minor. It should be expanded into an interdisciplinary minor, different from a toned down version of the major or revised into a concentration.

Nash: Believes the Religious Studies department is looking to build a minor to get more students to come in. They are trying to package Religious Studies in a way that students will find an engaging entry way into deeper studies in this field.

Garvey - In English – the catalog notes that students may also complete any concentration as a minor by fulfilling the 5 course concentration requirements. The minor in that area of study will be listed as a concentration.

Vernarelli –How would a minor in Religion in America (which would be listed on the transcript) benefit the students in any way differently than the major plus the concentration or the concentration fulfilled as a minor?

Boryczka – The idea is that Religious Studies is trying to bring students into the department; the minor has a much lower course requirement. It’s a channel for them to bring students into Religion.

Ruffini – Their minutes state that they are also working on a minor in Theology. They have not sent it to this Committee because of lack of certainty within the department itself pertaining to what the focus for a minor in Religious Studies actually is. It seems that we are tapping into a concern that they have for another pending minor, but didn’t have for this minor. If we send this back to them echoing that concern, it’s going to be a part of a conversation they are already having in their department.

Nash – The definition of minor does not exist in the governance document. As long as the clarification is that it is not a Religious Studies major and a Religious Studies minor with course overlap, I think we should approve it.

Bayne – Would like to invite the manager of this proposal to the next ASCC meeting to answers questions the Committee has regarding this proposal.

Ruffini – Will invite Ron Davidson to the next ASCC Committee meeting for further questions.

Ruffini – The final agenda item is pending further action from last semester, this will be reviewed at the next meeting.