Curriculum Committee Minutes
November 16, 1999
Present: Barry, Breitenbach, Cannon, Ives, Kerrick, Kontogeorgopoulos, Livingston, Mitani, NeffLippman, Neshyba (chair), Pasco-Pranger, Pinzino, Stevens, Sugimoto, Tomhave, Warning,
Washburn
Neshyba called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. The minutes for the meeting of November 9
were approved as posted. Barry announced the Regester Lecture by Geoffrey Block on
Wednesday evening.
Subcommittee Reports
The following subcommittees reported that they had begun to meet and were proceeding with
their business: Fine Arts Core, Communications II Core, Science in Context Core, Mathematical
Reasoning Core, and Writing in the Major. Sugimoto reported that the Society Core
subcommittee would present a list of courses for reapproval at the next committee meeting.
Warning (chair, Humanistic Perspective subcommittee) provided a list of 16 courses that his
subcommittee recommended for reapproval. He noted that about one dozen additional
Humanistic Perspective courses need further discussion before being brought forward for
reapproval. ACTION: Warning M/S/P that the following courses be reapproved as
Humanistic Perspective Core courses: Classics 210 (Greek Mythology), Classics 222
(Greco-Roman World), Classics 230 (The Classical Tradition), Classics 231 (Greek and
Roman Epic: Genre and Meaning), English 234 (Autobiography/Biography: The Self As
Hero), English 236 (Literature and the Quest for Human Identity), English 239 (Loss and
Renewal: American Voices, American Identity), English 255 (Introduction to Shakespeare),
Foreign Languages 115 (The Problem of Theodicy in World Literature), Foreign Languages
265 (The Lyric and Narrative Codes of Premodern Japanese Literature), Foreign
Languages 390 (Modern French Theatre: From Cocteau to Beckett), History 371 (American
Intellectual History to 1865), Humanities 206 (The Classics of Russian Literature),
Humanities 208 (Classics of East Asia), Religion 101 (Introduction to the Study of World
Religions), and Religion 108 (Desire and Discipline: The Question of the Ascetic Imperative
in Culture and Criticism).
Kontogeorgopoulos (chair, International Studies subcommittee) provided a list of 8 courses that
his subcommittee recommended for reapproval as International Studies Core courses. He noted
that two other courses need further discussion before being brought forward for reapproval.
Cannon asked how the subcommittee had handled the evaluation of International Political
Economy 201, especially in regard to the multiple instructors and multi-disciplinary aspirations of
that course. Kontogeorgopoulos, responding both as the chair of the subcommittee and as an
instructor in the course, stated that the instructors meet regularly to insure consistency across
sections and to support multi-disciplinary approaches in the course. ACTION:
Kontogeorgopoulos M/S/P that the following courses be reapproved as International
Studies Core courses: Comparative Sociology 209 (Africa and the Diaspora), Comparative
Sociology 240 (Tourism and the Global Order), Economics 162 (Introduction to
International Economic Studies), History 283 (The United States and Latin America),
International Political Economy 201 (Introduction to International Political Economy), Latin
American Studies 100 (Introduction to Latin American Studies), Politics and Government
102 (Introduction to Comparative Politics), and Politics and Government 103 (Introduction
to International Relations).
Ives (chair, Communication I subcommittee) recommended a new course for inclusion in the
Core. ACTION: Ives M/S/P that Foreign Languages 150 (Film, Memory, and the
Imagination of Disaster: A Freshman Seminar in Writing) be approved as a Communication
I Core course.
Neshyba (reporting for the absent chair of the Comparative Values subcommittee) stated that an
instructor had withdrawn a proposal to include an existing course in the Comparative Values Core
because the instructor was unwilling to modify the course syllabus by providing an explicit
discussion of Core guidelines, as requested by the subcommittee. A general discussion ensured
about whether the committee should require an explicit discussion of Core guidelines in the
syllabi of Core courses. Pasco-Pranger noted that the instructions on the back of the course
proposal form require instructors to provide such an explanation in their syllabi. Breitenbach
inquired if it would be sufficient to provide a rationale in a cover memorandum accompanying the
course proposal rather than in the syllabus itself. He wondered if the committee was concerned
about deficiencies in syllabi or deficiencies in courses. Sugimoto asked if a syllabus has to “sell
itself” as Core course by providing an express statement of the guidelines; he preferred to have
the relevant subcommittee read and interpret the syllabus for its adherence to the guidelines.
Livingston noted that members of the subcommittees, who are often from other disciplines, might
need a cogent argument distinctly stated in the syllabus to help them make a judgment about
whether the course meets the Core requirements. Pasco-Pranger remarked that this cogent
argument in the syllabus would also help the students understand the purposes of the Core.
Barry observed that the need for an explicit statement may vary with the Core rubric; in
Comparative Values courses a statement seems necessary. Cannon spoke in favor of
inconsistency. Although he agreed that the Comparative Values guidelines are so opaque as to
require explicit discussion in syllabi, he professed himself unsympathetic to the notion that all
Core courses should be expected to help promote the Core by discussing its purposes in their
syllabi. When asked about students’ attitudes, Mitani commented that students don’t read or
know about Core guidelines, but they are upset when there are not enough Comparative Values
and Science in Context Courses offered. Cannon thanked the subcommittee for reporting on this
issue and thereby provoking a valuable discussion.
Continuation of Calendar discussion
The committee returned to its discussion of guidelines for the fall-semester calendar. Neshyba
asked the committee to express its preferences for apportioning the two additional days in the fall
term. Two options were considered: Option I (a fall break on Monday and Tuesday, and adding
Wednesday to the Thanksgiving break) and Option II (a fall break on Monday and Tuesday, and
adding one additional instructional day to the fall term). A straw vote revealed that the committee
preferred Option I. ACTION: Stevens M/S/P that the Curriculum Committee recommend to
the Faculty Senate that the fall-semester calendar have a fall break on Monday and
Tuesday and that Wednesday be added to the current Thanksgiving break. Washburn
noted that committee needs to get the calendar business finished promptly. She urged the
committee to decide at its next meeting whether to retain or change the rule that fall semesters
must end no later than December 20.
At 5:02 p.m., Stevens M/S/P that the meeting adjourn. The next meeting will be held on
Tuesday, November 23, at 4:00 p.m. in Library 134.
Respectfully submitted,
William Breitenbach
Secretary