February 26, 2008
4:30-6:00, CC 214
Kendrick Brown (chair), Ellen Guyer, Pete Ferderer, Terri Fishel, Dan Keyser, Paul Maitland-McKinley, David Martyn, Diane Michelfelder, Jayne Niemi, Peter Weisensel, Eric Wiertelak, Karl Wirth
- The minutes from the February 19th meeting were approved.
- The course changes described in the draft circulation memo were approved, with the addition of a Russian literature course for which retroactive international diversity was requested.
- Allocations requests have been coming in. We are up to 7 requests right now. We reviewed what a conversion is, how we assign “case managers” to present each department’s request, and the summary forms we used last year. Either Karl or Kendrick will make those summary forms available. Case managers were assigned as follows: HMCS: Eric; GEOG: Peter; FREN: Kendrick; MATH: Karl; MUSI: Dan; HIST: Pete; WGSS: David. Cases will be presented in alphabetical order by department. A copy of the allocation memo sent by the Provost was distributed.
- Global Citizenship concentration proposal update. We have received some letters from departments, more information from Andrew, and we’re expecting additional information. We’ll look at this again next week.
- Student Athlete Class conflict policy: A statement from the adviser handbook was distributed. Kendrick will be meeting with the Athletic advisory committee. As far as we know this is only printed in the Adviser’s Handbook, and we agree that it should be in other places so that more faculty and students can see it. Faculty recalled that they used to receive a team schedule in advance from the coaches. We should also be examining the scheduling of mandatory class activities during times outside of the class schedule, which might interfere with rehearsals, performances and other co-curricular activities. At this point, the effort is to gather information and have a dialogue about the issues – the job of crafting a policy is ours.
- Gen Ed Course Review process: The next round is last chance for 2008 spring, and the first request for fall 2008 courses. The website should be opened when the email announcement goes out – target is March 3 or 4. Proposals are due March 31st. Decisions will be made & communicated by April 7th, in time for advising and registration.
- GES Assessment Project updates: Each subcommittee should be working on the discussion of assessment. It would be helpful to have a group meeting of MASC and the GES chairs. It might be possible to get some questions on the IDEA forms for spring. Karl will arrange the meeting.
- Departmental Honors Procedures Summary Document: Information was received from all but 5 departments. By and large there are no huge problems Programs and procedures vary by the number of honors participants in a department. This has revealed that there are some “best practices” we could recommend. For example, a process that is inclusive of a more faculty within a department than just the student’s adviser. Also, departmental Honors program policies should be put on the department’s website in a way that is detailed enough to help the student. It’s also very helpful to be clear about how progress will be assessed during the year – this is helpful within the department and to the students. One large program asks for a Declaration of Intent to Pursue honors. There appears to be great variation on whether defenses are public or private events. The final “product” should be something we can preserve – the current policy is to voluntarily store it in the Digital Commons. Should it be mandatory? There was discussion regarding “public” nature of honors research in an undergraduate setting. Out of this discussion we might find that EPAG should mandate some policy, but we know that at the very least, a document describing best practices would be helpful to the whole faculty. This whole discussion will be revisited.
- Revised academic structure document: This will be touched up one last time and sent out tomorrow. We started discussing implementation recommendations and as a result, we cut out numbers one and two. More discussion is on the agenda for next week.
- EPAG response to President’s letter: May members of the ad hoc committee meet to discuss the faculty governance piece of the letter? As to the curricular innovation piece, it was suggested that interested faculty could gather over the lunch hour Thursday next week and respond to the new programs piece of the EPAG proposal. Can EPAG members attend this? A public comment period was suggested instead.
Adjourned at 6:07 p.m.
Jayne Niemi, Registrar