MeetingNotes
UniversityStudiesAdvisoryCommittee
December15,2015
Participants
 PaulTownend
 JenniferHoran
 LindaSiefert
 CaraCilano
 AnitaMcDaniel
 MahnazMoallem
 VonYeager
 BradWalker
 ThomasCoombs
 MelindaAnderson
Notetaker:LeaBullard
 Areviewofnextsteps
o Sendrecommendationstodepartments
o HearfromLindaSiefertaboutadditionalassessmentresults
o Invitefacultywhowanttotalkaboutrecommendations/suggestions
tospeakwithUSAC
o PerhapsspeaktotheFSaboutthecurriculum—anexplanatory
overview
o Discussion:
 Prioritizechanges
 Thinkthroughthelonger‐termlogisticsofthechangesthatare
beingproposed
 Cross‐categoryrecommendationsonthetable:
o Nouniversitystudiescourseshouldcountinmorethanthree
categoriesofthiscurriculum(includingcompetencies).
o CoursesinA,B,C,Dof“ApproachesandPerspectives”shouldinclude
anappropriatedisciplinarygroundingandfocus.
o Nocoursecandouble‐countforagivenstudentintheApproachesand
Perspectivescategories(A‐F).
o NocoursesincategoriesA‐D(F?)shouldhaveprerequisites.
o Addframinglanguagetosendtodepartmentsaspartofthereview
processabouthowwearetryingtogetstudentstotheUniversity’s
LearningGoals(BradtodraftlanguagetosendtoPaul).
o Discussion:
 Keeplanguageconsistentanduse“component”andnot
“category”.
 Arethelower‐levelcoursesanintroductiontothefieldoran
introductiontothemethodsofthefield?








Onepossibilityistocreateacourseforthemajorsand
onefornon‐majors.
Ifit’sallgoingtobeinterdisciplinary,wedon’treally
needcomponents.
AILPhastheloosestlanguage.Othercomponentshave
operationalizedlanguageaboutdisciplinarymethods
“ofadiscipline”.
AILP:
o Struck“appreciate”intheSLO,leftitinthedescription—needtofix.
o Someofthelanguagereadslikesurveysarenotappropriatetothis
component;suggestrevisitthislanguage.
o ForApproachesandPerspectives,needtoharmonizelanguage,
reiteratewhatApproachesandPerspectivesissupposedtobe.
PerhapsacommonstatementforalltheApproachesandPerspectives
componentdescriptions.
SANW:
o Strike“speak”fromSLO3onthecomponentdescription(removedin
thepastsothisisjustbringingthelanguageuptospeed)
LGS:
o GS3:add“reflect”—onthe“individual’s…”
o Hownarrowintermsofgeographicscopeandissuefocuscanthese
coursesbeandstillcount?Addlanguagetosignaltoproposersthat
broaderisbetter.
o ShouldtherebeparitywithLDN?Generaldiscussionseemedtobe
“yes”.
o 2ndSLO:“solve”—perhapschangeto“reflecton”or“suggestsolutions”
LDN:
o SimilarissuetoAILP,remove“survey”whichcarriesaspecific
meaning.
o Wanttoaddlanguagethatpushesbackagainstproposalsinwhich
diversityisonlyasmallcomponentofthecourse.
IL:
o SLO3isreallytwoSLOs—synthesizeandappropriatelycitearereally
twodifferentthings.
o Therearealotofproposalsthatcomeinaboutinformation
technology.Forexample,CIShasadifferent,discipline‐specific
definitionof“informationliteracy”thatreadsmorelikeinformation
technology.TheseCIScoursesarealsousedbythebusinessschoolfor
alltheirILcourses.Waystoapproachtheproblem:keeptheSLOsand
betruetotheirmeaningwhenreviewingproposals,changetheSLOs,
orkeepandaccepttheiralternativedefinitionConsensusseemstobe
aboutkeepingtheSLOsfornow,butaddingframinglanguagetosend
todepartmentsaspartoftheSpringreviewprocessabouthowweare
tryingtogetstudentstotheUniversity’sLearningGoals,andsuggest
keepingtheILSLOstruetotheiroriginalintent.



WI:
o What’sthemostimportantthingwewantoutofWI?Theiterative
process.MaybeweshouldhaveonlytheoneSLOthatfocusesonthat
writingprocess.
o ThereshouldbesomeguidancethattheproposedthreeWIcourses
beatdifferentlevels.
o Carawillworkonarevision.
CC:
o Aswithmanyoftheothercomponentmaterials,someofthepreface
materialsneedtoberevisedtomatchtheproposedSLOs.
o Changethis,alongwithQLR,tobeacriticalthinkingcourse,which
givescriticalthinkingahomeinthecurriculum.
Clusters:
o USACwillreviewtheproposedClusterschanges(thatClusters
becomeoptional)beforethenextmeeting.
o Proposed:studentsorprogramsmustdemonstratean
interdisciplinaryexperience.
o Studentsneedtodoworktopulltogethertheirinterdisciplinary
experienceandthecommonthemesinthatexperience.