REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Minutes of the Meeting of the Curriculum Committee Eureka, SS 202 (Board Room); Mendocino Coast, Room 201; Del Norte, Room D5 September 14, 2012 Members Present: Peter Blakemore, Mike Cox, Utpal Goswami (Ex‐Officio), Toby Green, Michelle Haggerty, Erik Kramer, Ken Letko, Lisa Liken (Ex‐Officio), Mike Peterson, George Potamianos, Harry Pyke, Gary Sokolow. Members Absent: 1. Call to Order: Curriculum Committee Chair, Peter Blakemore, called the meeting to order at 1:08 p.m. 2. Introductions and Public Comment: Peter Blakemore welcomed new committee members: Lisa Liken and Harry Pyke. Lisa Liken is the Articulation Officer and Harry Pyke is the Eureka Non‐Teaching Representative. 3. Approval of the Minutes: Gary Sokolow moved to approve the minutes of the May 11, 2012 meeting, seconded by Erik Kramer. There being no objections, the minutes were approved as written. 4. Discussion Items 4.1 Program Learning Outcomes (PLOS) Approval Process Peter Blakemore has asked the Academic Senate that the approval Program Learning Outcome be a simple process. In future, when faculty submit a CCC‐511 form (Non‐Substantial Change) they will have to include a review of the Program Learning Outcomes. If there is no change to the PLOs, it should be noted in the memo included with the CCC‐511 submission to the Curriculum Committee. If PLOs are revised, in addition to the CCC‐511 form and the current and proposed requirements, faculty must include the existing PLOs and the proposed PLOs. The Curriculum Committee can respond back to the discipline experts and ask for changes if they feel the PLOs do not line up with Course Learning Outcomes. This is an additional review and approval process which we did not officially have in the past. Utpal Goswami also suggested that when PLOs are changed a new map and assessment plant be submitted as well. Gary Sokolow asked that the new information and procedures be added to the Curriculum website. Peter Blakemore will add this new procedure to the Curriculum Flow Chart. 4.2 Prerequisite Review The State Academic Senate thinks it is a good idea for all community colleges districts to review prerequisite and consider using cross‐disciplinary prerequisites to answer the needs for student success. This recommendation is from the Student Success Taskforce. Peter Blakemore proposed to the Academic Senate that an ad hoc committee made up Curriculum Committee members develop a plan on how to pursue the prerequisite initiative that is being promoted by the State Academic Senate. George Potamianos, Michelle Haggerty, Erik Kramer and Peter Blakemore volunteered to be on the ad hoc committee. The ad hoc committee, at the next Curriculum Committee meeting, will present a plan on how to implement prerequisite review district‐wide. The plan will use data analysis, interpretation of data and follow‐up. Utpal Goswami suggested identifying 4 to 6 courses that have issues and after one year of implementing cross‐disciplinary prerequisites analyze what happened. There will also be prerequisite review training for Curriculum Committee members at a future meeting. 4.3 Accreditation A lot of accreditation work is being done right now, there is so much that is different than seven months ago, there is a great deal to report. Several people were identified to help with a fast revision of the new self‐study. Peter Blakemore asked committee members to read the document when it’s open up for feedback. The document is due to the ACCJC on October 15th. 4.4 Paperless Curriculum Committee Peter Blakemore polled the committee to see who wants to continue receiving paper copies of the curriculum documents. We will be able to project documents on to the screen, just need more training on using the technology in the room. Gary Sokolow and Mike Cox requested paper copies of the original proposals. Gary Sokolow spoke with Geoff Cain about removing prior year’s forums from the Curriculum MyCR site. Geoff Cain thinks he has figured out a way to archive past forums. 4.5 Curriculum Survey Peter Blakemore said there was a lot of feedback from the Curriculum Survey sent out in April. Most of the feedback was favorable, some comments asked for clarity on the process and structure. Peter asked for feedback from the committee based on the survey results on ways to improve the Curriculum Committee. Gary Sokolow suggested a FAQ be posted on the Curriculum webpage on Inside.Redwoods.edu. Peter asked committee members to email good FAQ and answers to him. Peter Blakemore thought of doing an introductory email at the start of each semester of the Curriculum Committee’s role, its functions and processes. 4.6 Curriculum, Colleague and MIS Reporting: A Joint Venture Kathy Goodlive outlined what happens after curriculum approval and how the curriculum changes are reported to the Chancellor’s Office Management Information System (MIS). Changes made to reportable data elements on the course outline are recorded in Datatel and entered in the Curriculum Inventory. Each term, reportable data is extracted from Datatel into a Course Basic (CB) file, which is one of 17 files submitted to the Chancellor’s Office. MIS extracts data from the Curriculum Inventory every night to build the Master Course file. The CB Page 2 of 5 and the Master Course files must match perfectly. An error in a file will create a cascading effect of errors which causes the submission to be rejected. Kathy Goodlive also made a comment about the difficulty of implementing curriculum changes too soon. Peter Blakemore said we are not going to be able to tell colleagues that they can make a change and it will go into effect the next semester. This creates a cascading effect of errors in MIS. Peter met with Utpal and Paul Demark changed deadlines for the printed catalog. The first meeting in January will be the deadline for curriculum changes to appear in the printed 2013‐14 catalog. Utpal Goswami said any changes that that require Chancellor’s office approval will have an earlier deadline. 4.7 General Education Breadth and Generality This was discussed during the 5.1 discussion. 5. Action Items 5.1 Course Outline of Record form revisions Gary Sokolow [M], Michelle Haggerty [2nd]. Following discussion, the motion to approve was passed by the following roll call vote: Cox Y Green Y Haggerty Y Kramer
Y
Letko
Y
Peterson
Y
Potamianos
Y
Pyke Y Sokolow Y Discussion: 1. This new version of the course outline, uploaded to the Curriculum website, will be a protected document so drop‐down menus and fill‐in boxes work. 2. George Potamianos feels there is no consistency to how to determine breadth and generality to courses proposed for General Education status. He has his own methodology that he applies consistently but it does not appear that is the way it’s supposed to be interpreted. Peter Blakemore said the committee that worked on the SLOs for GE courses decided to leave it more open rather than defining it for everyone. 3. Gary Sokolow asked how to have expired DE courses removed from the Distance Education stoplight. Peter Blakemore said to submit a simple memo asking the course be removed from the active DE; it does not need to go through curriculum because the course is not being inactivated. 5.2 HRC‐3 Food and Beverage Service – Leigh Blakemore Gary Sokolow [M], Erik Kramer [2nd]. Following discussion, the motion to approve was passed by the following roll call vote: Cox Y Green Y Haggerty Y Kramer
Y
Letko
AB
Peterson
Y
Potamianos
Y
Pyke Y Sokolow Y With the following revisions: 1. Page 2 of 7 – CIP: Correct CIP code to 12.0504. 2. Page 3 of 7 – Course Types: Correct #3 mark “no” this course is not a stand‐alone. 5.3 Inactivation: ADCT‐14 – Rachel Anderson Gary Sokolow [M], Erik Kramer [2nd]. Following discussion, the motion to approve was passed by the following roll call vote: Cox Y Green Y Haggerty Y Kramer
Y
Letko
Y
Peterson
Y
Potamianos
Y
Pyke Y Sokolow Y Page 3 of 5 With the following revisions: 1. Change the catalog year inactivation becomes effective to Fall 2013. Discussion 2. This course is not a part of the State of California Addiction Studies program. 3. The committee is approving this inactivation with the understanding she will get the approval of the Vice President of Instruction. 5.4 Non‐substantial Change – Liberal Arts: Humanities and Communication – George Potamianos Gary Sokolow [M], Michelle Haggerty [2nd]. Following discussion, the motion to approve was passed by the following roll call vote: Cox Y Green Y Haggerty Y Kramer
Y
Letko
Y
Peterson
Y
Potamianos
Y
Pyke Y Sokolow Y With the following revisions: 1. Including CINE 1, 2 and 3 to the Liberal Arts: Humanities degree is a quality improvement from outcomes assessment during discussion at the Assessment Summit. 5.5 SNLAN‐1B Elementary American Sign Language ‐ Julie Symons This item was pulled by the author. 5.6 MUS‐12 American Popular Music – Ed Macan Gary Sokolow [M], Erik Kramer [2nd]. Following discussion, the motion to approve was passed by the following roll call vote: Cox Y Green Y Haggerty Y Kramer
Y
Letko
Y
Peterson
Y
Potamianos
Y
Pyke Y Sokolow Y With the following revisions: 1. Page 1 of 8 ‐ Summary of Change matrix: Under Recommended Prep, add “ENGL‐150” in old box and “ENGL‐1A” in the new box. 2. Page 5 of 8 – Course Types: #1 mark the “Yes” this course is a part of a CCCCO approved degree. 3. Page 7 of 8 – Propose CRGE: uncheck the Writing and Analytical Thinking boxes. Discussion: 1. Gary Sokolow and Erik Kramer had concerns about the number of SLOs. Ed Macan feels he can comfortably do the assessments, he also consulted the other music instructor and there was no disagreement. Ed will work with other instructor to harmonize their tests so they are able to use the same rubric. Ed Macan wants to run through an assessment cycle before doing a reduction of the SLOs because a reduction now would just be arbitrary. After running through a complete assessment cycle, Ed will have a more nuanced sense of whether to reduce the SLOs. 2. The UC system will not articulate with a community college course if the textbook is older than five years except for history; the UC requests that representative texts be published within the last three years, except in special circumstances. George Potamianos [M], Gary Sokolow [2nd]. Following discussion, the motion to approve CRGE was passed by the following roll call vote: Cox Y Green Y Haggerty Y Kramer
Y
6. Announcements and Open Forum Letko
Y
Peterson
Y
Potamianos
Y
Pyke Y Sokolow Y Page 4 of 5 There were no announcements at this time. 7. Adjournment: On motion by Erik Kramer, seconded by Mike Cox, the meeting was adjourned at 3:08 p.m. Next Meeting: September 28, 2012 Page 5 of 5