GENERAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE MINUTES, 9/17/14
CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Members present:, S. Caro, M Cracolice, K. Huthaily, N. McCrady, J. Randall, T. Shearer, T.
Squires
Ex-officio Members present: B. Howard,
Members Absent/ Excused: S. Bradford, L. Calderon, N. Lindsay, K. Reiser
Guest: G. Weix
Minutes: The minutes from 9/3/14 were approved.
COMMUNICATION ITEM:

Andrew Ware will meet with the Committee on October 1st to discuss its role in
the Academic Alignment and Innovation Program.

Chair Caro received an inquiry from a student on study abroad in Ireland
regarding whether one of her courses would fulfill a general education
requirement. The Office of International Programs establishes agreements with
the student in regard to the courses taken at UM’s study abroad partner. The
student receives credit when the transcript is received by the Admissions Office
consistent with other transfer courses.
The Committee agreed that a statement should be added to the website to direct
students to the correct resource. Beth Howard agreed to draft language.

A second inquiry came from the Faculty Senate Chair elect who was at the Board
of Regents meeting. He was wondering whether students with dual credit
courses were given credit towards general education. Dual credit courses are
considered equivalent to the course offered by UM. So if the UM course is
approved for general education, then the dual credit course would be as well.
BUSINESS ITEMS

Members reviewed the assessment samples provided by Associate Provost
Lindsay, but questioned how completing the report makes the instructor or
students perform better. There may be alternative pathways for improving
classroom instruction, such as faculty discussions. The relevance of metrics to
specific courses will be inconsistent. The best method of assessment comes from
the classroom itself. The Committee should trust the instructor to choose the
method that best aligns with the course content.
Crafting assessment reports for each general education course seems onerous
especially when the individual completing the general education forms may not
be the actual course instructor. This requirement would be a disincentive for
faculty to teach general education courses. Currently teaching general education
courses is voluntary. The only incentive is the possibility of higher enrollment
because students need to fulfill a requirement.
It would be difficult to show that the time faculty spend documenting the course
assessment will have a positive impact on students. The University-wide
Program-level Writing Assessment is a good model for assessing skills based
general education, but it is very time intensive. Getting faculty together that
teach the various groups could be beneficial. This could be linked to the rolling
review, but the administration would need to provide funding for training /
development workshops. The attendees could create the materials for
distribution to the general education instructors for that specific group. This
structure may make the conversation more meaningful.
The roll of the Committee is to advocate on the behalf of faculty to improve
teaching in a way that is not an undue burden.
It was suggested that the Committee develop materials for department chairs to
provide to instructors of general education courses. The forms could be a
training tool that outlines expectations of the course for the instructor.
Everyone teaching a general education course could get the approved form and
an explanation of the obligation to teach the learning outcomes.
A Working Group consisting of Professors Huthaily, and Randal along with Camie
was established to work on revamping the form to be a more meaningful
training tool. Professor Weix agreed to help make the form assessable.

The Committee decided it will determine how to distribute the workload for the
review of the symbolic system exemption forms once the quantity of
submissions is known.
GOOD AND WELFARE

One program that clearly meets the 48 credit threshold would like to give students the
choice of symbolic system courses depending on their focus. The current framework
requires the symbolic systems to be required by the major.

Professor Weix would like the Committee to consider creating a list of valid symbolic
systems substitutions for students with disabilities.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:10p.m.