From: GenEdCommittee [GENEDCOMMITTEE@LISTSERV.COFC.EDU] on behalf of Eichelberger, Julia L.
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 9:33 PM
To: GENEDCOMMITTEE@LISTSERV.COFC.EDU
Subject: Some suggestions

First, I wanted to note that in the minutes that I gave Bob and that he forwarded today, the very last item is incorrect, as you probably realized. It says that in Fall 2006 the faculty committees will formally review the Gen Ed proposal, and that in Spring 2006 the senate will vote on it, and of course that sequence is impossible. At the meeting last week we were talking about bringing it before the Senate in Spring 2007. (I really think that is our best hope of success.) 


OK, so now I have something else. In our discussion today, Gordon suggested that it would be most practical to identify specific questions for ourselves, and then for the rest of the faculty, to address. Since the biggest change we seem to want to make is in the delivery system, I thought I would draft a beginning description of what those changes could look like. I am suggesting we get faculty input on these at our fall retreat/workshop. (Then, if we seemed to have sufficient support for them in principle, we could get subcommittees working on the minutiae of implementing each one, and then present that entire draft proposal to the faculty the following semester at the Workshop II.) I know that some people have not been able to be in on these summer discussions and I don’t mean to be presumptive when I suggest these things—but I am hoping that they will help us have something to discuss, or to provoke other ideas. Ultimately, I think we need to have some concrete options to offer faculty for their consideration, if the retreat-workshop thingy is to succeed. 


My suggestions I (Freshman Seminar) and II (Learning Communities) have been bandied about already this past semester. Suggestion III fleshes out another idea we’ve discussed—finding ways of integrating coursework in the major, and faculty members from all departments, into Gen Ed goals—something that many departments are already doing. The remaining ones are in response to the Provost’s suggestions for skills and perspectives that our current Gen Ed requirements don’t explicitly address: communication across the curriculum, global or multicultural perspectives, and technological literacy (especially for research). 


In keeping with our tentative consensus, none of these suggestions constitute additional course requirements in themselves, although students would end up choosing some of their courses—either Gen Ed, major, or elective courses—in order to satisfy these new requirements. Some of them can also be satisfied by internships or study abroad. These “check-off” requirements would be documented by the student and then, when the requirements had been met, the Registrar would be informed and the transcript would indicate that the requirement had been satisfied on such and such a date. I think there would be a value in having the student be responsible for presenting the documentation, rather than having it registered automatically—this would be another way to help students become more conscious of what they are learning and of the connections between various courses. I think if this were set up properly, it would be far less cumbersome to evaluate than an e-portfolio (although I am not opposed to e-portfolios, because I think students would benefit from doing them—I just don’t see how we could get them all evaluated in any meaningful way). OK, so here are the ideas. 


Suggested modifications to the Gen Ed requirements 


I) Add Freshman seminar, as proposed by Academic Planning Committee 
--could satisfy a Gen Ed requirement, or it could be an elective as is the existing FRSR (As per proposal, Gen Ed or some other committee would decide which area it satisfied depending on the topic) 
–will be taught by specialist but be geared for first-year students 
--via its assignments and seminar format, will teach research methodology and critical thinking 
--other activities (advising, attending cultural events) will integrate them into campus life and academic engagement 
--would be optional, for students and faculty who desire such an experience 


II) Add First-year Learning Communities 
--Students of any freshman seminar will become LC—perhaps be registered in one other course together, perhaps not 
--All remaining students not taking freshman seminar will be in LC with 2 linked regular courses and one non-credit or one-credit course designed to integrate them into campus life and academic engagement 


III) Continue the goals of Gen Ed within the major 
Major should be developmentally organized and should explicitly apply the Gen Ed goals to students’ disciplinary training and knowledge base 
--Coursework in every major will include a designated beginning, middle, and end 
--Every major will have an explicit strategy, appropriate to its discipline, for instruction that will continue the training begun in Gen Ed courses (esp in English and Freshman Seminar) in research, critical thinking, and oral and written communication 
--Major will require student to extend the knowledge and skills of the major into a context beyond the classroom. Student will do this in one or more of the following ways: undergraduate research, internship, or upper-level interdisciplinary work (for example, a minor or a thematic cluster of courses). Each department will develop its own options for how their majors can satisfy this requirement. 


IV) Add requirement in Multicultural and International Perspectives 
This requirement could be satisfied by 2-3 significant experiences that required students to use or acquire a multicultural or international perspective. By the time they had, say, 90 credit hours, students would be required to submit documentation showing how they fulfilled this requirement. If they did not have it completed by the 90 hour-mark, they would not be able to register until they had submitted a plan for satisfying the requirement. The following could be used: 
1) a semester of foreign language study beyond the fourth semester could satisfy ½ the requirement 
2) study or internship in a foreign country could satisfy ½ the requirement (This could be certified by Study Abroad office) 
3) study or internship in the US in which student was immersed in a non-American cultural environment could satisfy ½ the requirement. (An example of the kind of work that would be eligible would be an internship with a health clinic serving migrant laborers who are primarily from outside the US. Internship office could develop a form whereby student could document this.) 
4) Some other C of C courses could satisfy these perspectives (for example, courses in African Writers, Native American Religions, Latin American Studies, etc.). Students who have completed one of the preceding requirements (1-3) would need 1 such course to complete their requirement. Students who have not done any of 1-3 would need 3 such courses. 


Students’ documentation for meeting this requirement would be evaluated individually, in much the same way transfer applications are evaluated. However, it could be pretty routine and could be done by office staff, once the forms for #2 and #3 and the list of courses for #4 had been established. The Assessment Committee (or the Gen Ed committee) could evaluate any proposal to add a course to the list. Once the student’s experiences and/or coursework had been certified, the registrar would record on their transcript that they had completed the requirement. 
V) Communication across the curriculum 
The report by the Committee on Communication Across the Curriculum made a number of broad recommendations for strengthening this facet of our instruction. None of their recommendations were for new course requirements, but were suggestions for improving the instruction in communication skills that we are already doing. Here it is 
http://www.cofc.edu/CAC/reportcontents.htm 
(Is there anything else still in play with regard to the CAC committee? If so, please correct me!) Using the suggestions outlined above, research and writing/communication skills would be taught explicitly in Freshman Seminar, English 101 and 102, and in the major. The Gen Ed committee should review the research component every five (?) years to make sure the instruction stays current with existing information technology.