EPAG Minutes

September 25, 2006

2:45-4:15, Campus Center 205

 

Kendrick Brown, Beth Cleary, Cheryl Contant,  Ellen Guyer, Jayne Niemi, Joan Ostrove, Wang Ping, Michael Schneider,  Jacob Wartman (except during the discussion of Item 2), Peter Weisensel (co-chair), Karl Wirth (co-chair)

 

  1. The minutes from last week’s meeting were approved.
  2. We considered the request from Political Science to hire without a national search.   Our job is to assess curricular need for the position in the College as a whole.   Karl will start the draft of our report.
  3. Changes to the faculty by-laws are being proposed by FPC, specifically regarding the appeals process.  Members of that committee feel that there is a conflict in the language regarding who may bring motions to the faculty.  This language needs to be cleaned up to reflect actual practice.  A sub-group of FPC and EPAG will get together and clarify what needs to be changed in the handbook and by-laws.  That sub-group will be Joan and Peter from EPAG, Terry Boychuk and Karen Saxe.  Joan and Peter will report back to EPAG.
  4. A document from the Center for Global Citizenship (Andrew Latham) describing their idea for a certificate program was distributed.  We had many questions, and asked Peter to convey them to the IGC.  First, since the College has not endorsed the idea of a certificate program, some committee members think that the first step is to consider the positive and negative impacts of such a program.  Why does this not fit into the existing model of a concentration?  The Institute is not a department, and can not therefore offer its own courses or minors.  Is there a long-term plan to move towards departmental status?  What about the relationship to general graduation requirements, which were developed with some of the same goals in mind?  Should not all of our graduates be global citizens by virtue of having completed their degree at Macalester?   Of the three elements described, the emphasis seems much heavier on the curricular element than on the co-curricular and reflection elements.  On a more detailed level, we were concerned about the number of courses required, noting that it seems more like a second major.   Is this factor limiting participation to a small group of students instead of being open to all?    Peter will take our concerns back to Andrew Latham.
  5. Karl reminded the GES committee leaders to move those approval forms along!  He will send the template via email.

 

Adjourned 4:15 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Jayne Niemi, Registrar