G ENERAL E DUCATION C OMMITTEE M INUTES , 10/7/15
C ALL TO O RDER / R OLL C ALL
Members present: L. Ametsbichler, S. Bradford, M Cracolice, R. Fanning, C. Greenfield, K.
Reiser, C. Smith, G. Weix
Ex-officio members present: B. French, N. Lindsay
Members Absent/ Excused: J. Galloway, T. Ravas T. Shearer
Minutes: The minutes from 9/23/15 were amended and approved.
C OMMUNICATION

Chair Reiser met with ASCRC Chair and past chair to discuss the process for students with disabilities to request general education course substitutions. The needs of the students vary, so she was not comfortable with a precedent list of courses. Currently the Graduation Appeals Committee reviews these petitions. However, seems like the review for the substitution should occur before the student is applying for graduation.
One option would be for a member of the General Education Committee to serve on the
Graduation Appeals Committee, or create a subcommittee of the General Education
Committee to review the substitution requests. ASCRC Chair Tim Manuel is drafting a procedure which will include the student working with DSS and their advisor. It is important that the process be equitable for students and getting the word out about the substitution request procedure.
The first meeting of the Graduation Appeals Committee was last week. The Committee will be revising the form. It currently cannot be filled out electronically and requires the student to make six copies. There needs to be a better resource for students regarding transfer credits. A student was routed to the Faculty Senate Office who was petitioning to have a transfer course satisfy the American & European perspective. She tried to get the History department to sign as the chair. Apparently students can negotiate with admissions at the time of matriculation, but many students do not know this. Although there is a Transfer Guide on Cyberbear that indicates what courses transfer, there should be a better web resource for transfer students.

B USINESS I TEMS

There were seven (correction 8) general education forms submitted for review. Chair
Reiser suggested that we group them as indicated below. The American &European and
Indigenous & Global Perspective groups will also draft revised the criteria and learning outcomes. The chairs of these groups are encouraged to get feedback from faculty who teach in the perspective. If there are issues with a form the Group Chair should email the instructor and copy the department chair. Camie will send a follow-up email with the link to the forms and the assignments.
Forms
Group III Exception (1)
Natural Science (1)
Expressive Art (1)
Literary & Artistic Studies (2)
American & European (changed to 2)
& Criteria /Learning goals
Members
Mark
Tammy
Ray
Julia
Chase
Tobin
Liz
Chris
Indigenous & Global (1)
& Criteria / Learning Goals
G.G.
Sue
 The Committee elected Professor Weix and Bradford as Co-chairs Elect.

Professor Shearer sent an email communication after the last meeting regarding his thoughts on general education reform. The best place to start any discussion of reform is with a needs analysis. Talking groups would be a good place to start. It would be helpful to understand what the administration considers problematic. Perhaps a few committee members could meet with the deans. Chair Reiser asked for volunteers to help frame the conversation in order to get productive feedback. Professor Bradford volunteered. The Faculty Senate Chair Bill Borrie wonders about the drivers for general education change. Does our current program train students properly for the rapidly changing world?
The Committee has identified issues with the program during rolling reviews of the

groups. Many of the courses in the Indigenous and Global Group do not have a comparative element, which is thought to be the intention. It is really two categories merged, but has morphed into geographical regions. What would be the pros and cons of replacing this requirement with a diversity perspective? That perhaps includes an
American Indian Education for all component to be in compliance with the state mandate. Likewise the American and European perspective was intended to cover the heritage of democratic institutions or civics. Encourage chairs to solicit feedback from faculty that teach in the area.
There are complaints regarding the navigability of the framework. Veteran students have difficulty when courses in their four-year degree plan are not offered. There is a perception that the courses change frequently. Why do they have to be reviewed every four-years? At most institutions general education courses do not change. The designation should last for at least five years. Most students experience with general education is directly linked to the quality of advising they receive.
It would be good for the Committee to understand how prescriptive programs are with general education choices for their students. The professional schools in particular often have very rigid requirements that only a few general education courses will fit.
On the other hand, the accrediting agency for Journalism only allows 40 credits to be taken in the major. Feedback should also be gathered from department chairs, professional advisors, and the Director of Veteran Services. Another listening session might focus on at risk groups such as international, Native American, and Trio students.
Looking at the data of general education enrollment and offerings over the past several years would also be helpful. The reports from the Diversity Council and the
Internationalization Lab could also inform the discussion. This semester the Committee will focus on identifying the stake holders and the critical questions of a needs assessment. The listening sessions will take place in the spring. A distinction will need to be made between the technical, practical and logistical issues verses the structure of the framework. Hopefully the needs assessment can go forward to the Faculty Senate at the end of the spring semester.
Chair Reiser will be participating in the lunch activity at the conference on October 25-
26. This will be a good opportunity to gather feedback. Hopefully there will be a lot of student engagement. ASUM is requiring senators to attend when they can. According to Associate Provost Lindsay there will be a lot of note takers at the event. These will be posted after the conference. There is one more meeting before the conference. Chair

Reiser hopes that members will provide some additional insight as to the strengths and weaknesses of the current general education program. Feedback is welcome via email.
Another opportunity for dialogue is at the DIversU event on November 4 th and 5 th . The deadline for presentations was September 30 th , but the Student Coordinator asked for more faculty involvement and suggested the deadline was flexible at the last Faculty
Senate meeting.
On a side note the Cal State model that was sent to the Committee as an innovative general education framework was how the GLA started. One of the weaknesses of the current program is that there is not a coherent them. Students choose courses that fit in their schedule rather than choosing courses that benefit an inspired course of study grounded in competencies.

There is a shortage in online general education courses. There are no American and
European or Language courses available online. Unfortunately UM Online does not have funds for faculty to develop new courses. The only time additional online courses are made available is it replaces a face-to-face course. Professor Reiser offered an online section of a general education course and it filled within two weeks in contrast to the face-to-face course that did not have enough students enrolled to teach. Some disciplines do not translate well to the format and the faculty are also not trained to teach online. For some departments the dean provides a limited choice of what can be offered.
A
DJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.