Received by Undergraduate Coordinating Council—October 7, 2010
With the exception of new course UNIV 198
COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
First Meeting/2010-11 Academic Year
September 16, 2010
Approved
i of vi
PRESENT:
G. Aase (BUS/OMIS), D. Changnon (Acting Associate Vice Provost), J. Gray-Stanley
(HHS/NUHS), M. Lenczewski (LAS/GEOL, chair), R. Schneider (VPA/THEA), E. Seaver
(Vice Provost, ex officio), F. Solares-Larrave (LAS/FL--), R. Tatara (EET/TECH), S.
Wallace (EDU/ETRA/UCC/CITC), A. Ward (LAS/POLS)
CONSULTANTS: D. Smith (Catalog Editor/Curriculum Coordinator), S. Woods (CITC)
GUESTS:
D. Johnson, G. Long, C. Spears, J. Spears, R. Tripodi
FIRST MEETING ENCLOSURES
The following informational items were sent to committee members: 2010-11 meeting schedule;
2010-11 CUC membership; electronically approved minutes of April 8, 2010; CUC Annual Report
2009-10; CUC bylaws; Subcommittee on the Review of Contract Majors and KNPE 101 LetterSuffixed Courses; Working Rules for Presentations to the CUC by Units Holding Conflicting Points
of View on Curricular Items; Nonduplication and Impact on Other Units, Guidelines for Certificates
of Undergraduate Study; and Guidelines for the Development of Interdisciplinary Courses.
Introductions were made.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Wallace made a motion, seconded by Solares-Larrave, to APPROVE THE AGENDA. Motion
passed unanimously.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1. CUC members were reminded that if they are unable to attend a CUC meeting, they can name a
substitute to represent their constituency. If they know who that person will be prior to the
mailing of the agenda packets, they should inform Donna Smith (753-0126, dsmith@niu.edu) so
the packet can be sent directly to the substitute; otherwise, they should give their packet to the
substitute.
New CUC members should note that the consent agenda is used to expedite the consideration of
some college curriculum committee minutes and other straightforward and/or noncontroversial
curricular items. If a CUC member has a question/concern about or wants to discuss any item on
the consent agenda, he or she should ask to have that item removed from the consent agenda and
added to the items for discussion prior to the approval of the consent agenda.
The CUC is the curricular body for interdisciplinary undergraduate curricular material not
located in an academic college or colleges, specifically UNIV 101 and curricular offerings from
Received by Undergraduate Coordinating Council—October 7, 2010
With the exception of new course UNIV 198
COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
First Meeting/2010-11 Academic Year
September 16, 2010
Approved
ii of vi
the Division of International Programs and the Center for Black Studies. This responsibility
includes usual curricular activity (new, revised, and deleted courses as well as other catalog
changes), general education submissions/resubmissions, and review of these units’ overall
curricular offerings.
2. Items previously in Section B, now reported for inclusion in the catalog (Section C).
3. Items reported for inclusion in the catalog by another standing committee of the UCC (Section
D).
4. Reorganization in the Vice Provost’s Office. Seaver explained that with the retirement of Harold
Kafer, Provost Alden has asked Seaver to take on more of the strategic plan work. So Dave
Changnon was hired as an acting associate vice provost to relieve Seaver of some of his other
duties, including the committee work. Changnon will be attending the Undergraduate
Coordinating Council (UCC) and all the committees that report to the UCC, among other duties.
CONSENT AGENDA
It was noted that college minutes with no controversial items are included in the consent agenda.
Aase made a motion, seconded by Solares-Larrave, to RECEIVE THE COLLEGE MINUTES
WITH NO UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULAR ITEMS. The motion passed unanimously. The
following college minutes with no undergraduate-level curricular items were so received.
College of Business #16 (AY 09-10)
College of Education #10 (AY 09-10)
College of Education #12 (AY 09-10)
Aase made a motion, seconded by Schneider, RECEIVE THE COLLEGE MINUTES WITH
UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULAR ITEMS. The motion passed unanimously. The following
college minutes with undergraduate-level curricular items were so received.
College of Business #17 (AY 09-10)
College of Engineering and Engineering Technology #11 (AY 09-10)
College of Health and Human Sciences #11 (AY 09-10)
College of Health and Human Sciences #12 (AY 09-10)
COLLEGE MINUTES AND OTHER CURRICULAR ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
College of Business,
#15 (AY 09-10)
In these minutes is new course MGMT 417 and revisions to the B.S. in
management. Seaver pointed out their nonduplication statement and wondered if
nothing in Leadership, Educational Psychology, and Foundations would apply.
Wallace didn’t think they had any courses that were duplicates. Schneider
Received by Undergraduate Coordinating Council—October 7, 2010
With the exception of new course UNIV 198
COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
First Meeting/2010-11 Academic Year
September 16, 2010
Approved
iii of vi
commented that the term “change” is very broad. Aase responded that in this
instance change refers to organizational resistance to changes in business
organizations. Aase made a motion to RECEIVE THE UNDERGRADUATE
CURRICULAR ITEMS IN BUSINESS #15 (3/30/10). Pending no second, there
was further discussion. Seaver pointed out the responsibilities of the CUC in the
bylaws and that the CUC reports curricular actions to the UCC without comment
unless they involve course duplication or overlap between colleges, cross-college
concerns, or university standards. Schneider pointed out that making the catalog
clear and meaningful is of concern to the university. Aase responded that students
cannot get to this particular course if they aren’t a business major and the course
description would be meaningful to them. Schneider seconded the motion. Motion
passed unanimously.
College of Education
#11 (AY 09-10)
Among the undergraduate items in these minutes is new course TLSE 465. It is also
marked for CITC approval. Seaver reported that CITC decided to use the CUC to
deal with CITC related curricular items and will have a CITC representative
attending the meetings as an observer. It was noted that Woods was attending for
CITC chair-elect J.D. Bowers due to a scheduling conflict. But since Wallace is a
member of CITC and is already attending CUC meetings, it was decided that he
could be the CITC observer. Tatara asked about the term “RtI” in the rationale.
Wallace responded that it stands for Response to Intervention. It is to ensure that
every student meets the goals set out for the teacher and, if not, what will be the
response. Wallace made a motion, seconded by Gray-Stanley, to RECEIVE THE
UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULAR ITEMS IN EDUCATION MINUTES #11
(3/23/10). Motion passed unanimously.
College of
Engineering and
Engineering
Technolgy #10 (AY
09-10)
There are several issues in these minutes. The main concern is that the college is
adding courses to a program that are outside of the college without providing the
documentation regarding the availability of those courses. Seaver noted that the
COMS, ECON, and PSYC courses are very hard to get into, therefore this would
limit the choices engineering students have for their electives and/or would lengthen
the time it would take to complete their degrees. Lenczewski pointed out that many
of these courses should not be listed as technical electives. The CUC also discussed
developing a policy for colleges to check on capacity of courses they may be
considering from outside their own colleges. Wallace added that the College of
Education has a form they use to notify other colleges when they are deleting one of
their courses from a program and the form could easily be used when one college is
adding courses from another. He provided Smith with a copy of the form and Smith
will get this issue on the agenda for the curricular deans. Schneider also suggested a
wording change for the revision to ELE 429: “… including safety and cost
effectiveness, as well as and must employ.” Tatara pointed out the minor in
sustainable engineering, under technical elective courses, it should read “(5-6)” and
“select 2 courses.” [Note: The CUC approved the minor in sustainable engineering
on 2/11/10 pending the above clarifications, which the college did clarify.] Aase
Received by Undergraduate Coordinating Council—October 7, 2010
With the exception of new course UNIV 198
COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
First Meeting/2010-11 Academic Year
September 16, 2010
Approved
iv of vi
made a motion, seconded by Scheider, to TABLE COLLEGE OF ENGINEEIRNG
AND ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY #10 (2/25/10) PENDING
CLARIFICATION OF THE ISSUES LISTED. Motion passed unanimously.
OLD BUSINESS
EET #6. CEET #10 from above replaces this time so it can be removed from the agenda.
NEW BUSINESS
1. Service Learning Courses—Julia Spears. Spears reported that the proposal before the CUC
came out of the Strategic Plan Curricular Innovations Task Force and is the product of a
committee she has been working with. The proposal includes a consolidated definition of
service learning that can be used across campus, rationale, course models and key components in
a service learning course, and how faculty can respond. This will serve to enhance involvement
of student in service learning activities. Her intent is to formalize through the curricular process
two things. The first is to agree on a definition; what does service learning mean, what are the
level of standards, etc. There will be a website that will help clarify service learning for the NIU
community and will include a database of service learning opportunities. The second part of the
proposal is to identify service learning courses. The proposal lists five elements that should be
present in a course to enable it to be identified as having service learning components. Those
elements are: provide meaningful engagement with the community, make connections between
service learning and course material, require a minimum of 20 service hours per course, careful
integration of service activities into the course, and understand and use reflection activities as
rigorous teaching and learning strategy. Spears also proposed a process for identifying courses,
either as new course proposals or for existing courses, and how to track service learning courses
in Registration and Records. Seaver added that from the CUC’s perspective, there will be a
process for identifying if a new course has a service learning component. The CUC will also be
seeing a similar proposal in the coming months regarding distance education. Lenczewski asked
if this would be a process where a course is so identified each semester and Spears responded
that her office could monitor that each semester. It is Spears’s hope to work within the current
system to identify courses. Wallace asked about the checklist for the courses and how civic
learning is defined and Spears responded that it’s part of the service learning definition,
“organized service activity that meets identified community needs.” She added, however, that
faculty need to define what civic engagement and service learning mean within their disciplines.
Discussion followed to further clarify definitions and the process for identifying the courses in
MyNIU each semester. Aase asked what is the benefit to the university, what should CUC
members tell faculty so they’ll want to get involved. Seaver responded that one of the visions of
the university that came out of the Strategic Plan was that NIU is an engaged university. This
proposal is a way to further define engaged activities and courses at NIU and it’s important for
attracting students. It’s also a way to document to the Carnegie Foundation that NIU is doing
service learning.
Received by Undergraduate Coordinating Council—October 7, 2010
With the exception of new course UNIV 198
COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
First Meeting/2010-11 Academic Year
September 16, 2010
Approved
v of vi
2. Course proposal from the Office of the Vice Provost—Julia Spears. Spears explained that the
proposed course, UNIV 198, Topics in Academic Success and Student Leadership, is also a
product of the Strategic Plan as well as the need to have an anchor course for the Themed
Learning Communities (TLC). The two TLCs being offered this semester are using UNIV 101,
but it became apparent that the content in UNIV 101 shouldn’t be altered to fit the TLCs. The
new course will be a variable credit topics course, which can be used by many areas such as
Office for Academic Advising Center, Intercollegiate Athletics, and Student Academic Success.
It was clarified for CUC members that the CUC is the curriculum committee for interdisciplinary
courses such as UNIV 198. Aase made a motion, seconded by Solares-Larrave, to APPROVE
NEW COURSE UNIV 198. Wallace asked what was the official course outline and Spears
noted that it is included in the course proposal. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Baccalaureate Review Task Force Report—Greg Long—walk-in item. Long provided the
background of the process. One issue that came out of the strategic plan was the need to reform
the general education program. A team from NIU then attended an AAC&U workshop in the
summer of 2008, and it became apparent that the general education goals could not be revised
until the baccalaureate goals were revised. A steering committee and task force was formed and
during the 2008-09 academic year input was received from over 1000 participants through
several avenues (e.g. focus groups and surveys). During the summer of 2009, the responses
were evaluated and the result was three main goals: communication, context, and critical
thinking. More feedback was solicited and those goals were amended to: communication,
creativity, and critical thinking. Context will be addressed in each of the different program
areas. In Spring, 2010, goal development teams met and developed over 60 learning outcomes
for the goals. The steering committee then refined those into the document provided to the CUC.
Long pointed out the purpose statement on page 1 and the goal definitions on page 2. He is also
asking CUC members take the proposal back to their colleges then for CUC’s approval of the
entire document at the October 14 CUC meeting. Discussion followed regarding the language.
Long noted that the task force struggled with keeping the goals simple versus too academic. He
asked for input if CUC members thought there was a clearer way to state things. He added that
the outcomes are purposely broad-based so they could be applied to many areas across campus
such as student affairs, general education, and major programs. Wallace asked if there would be
examples and Long stated that specific examples would be developed at the next level, once the
general goals are approved. The General Education Committee will also get involved at that
level to look at the general education goals using the new baccalaureate goals as the foundation.
OTHER BUSINESS
1. Print Catalogs. Lenczewski asked if the CUC members could all receive their own print copy of
the 2010-11 undergraduate catalog. Changnon will make sure the CUC members get one before
the next meeting.
Received by Undergraduate Coordinating Council—October 7, 2010
With the exception of new course UNIV 198
COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
First Meeting/2010-11 Academic Year
September 16, 2010
Approved
vi of vi
2. Double majors/degrees/majors and minors. The issue of using one course to fulfill the
requirements for more than one degree was discussed last year, with no conclusion. The CUC
will continue to look at developing a policy that defines how many hours are needed for a second
major or degree, as well as the minimum number of hours required for a minor. Wallace added
that this is timely in light of new ISBE standards for teacher certification where courses have to
be identified as either general education or professional courses; they can’t be both. Changnon
stated he would have his graduate assistant look at the MAC schools and other peer institutions
to see what their policies are on this issue. CUC members discussed if it is their role to further
discuss these issues. Smith read from the bylaws that the CUC can “recommend general policies
regarding the design of the undergraduate curriculum.” Aase also noted that the template for
designing certificates of undergraduate and graduate study is outdated.
3. Course revision versus new course. Aase observed that every year, with new members joining
the CUC, course revisions seem to be handled differently, for example, if a department is
proposing both title and description change, should it be considered a new course. Smith read
the section of the APPM dealing with course revisions: “Course Revisions
1. When implementing a course revision the initiating department (or college) should provide a
supporting statement explaining the need for the change.
2. Courses that keep the same or similar title but whose course description bears little
conceptual resemblance to the original course will be treated as new courses.
3. A course revision may affect one or more of the following:
a. course number.
b. course description (editorial changes), to clarify, abbreviate, or expand current
descriptions (but not to expand course content so much as to warrant a new course
proposal), or to incorporate recent developments or shifts of focus in a topic area.
c. course title to conform to changing terminology within the discipline, or to reflect a
change in course description, but with due sensitivity to cultural issues;
d. number of credit hours that may be earned;
e. prerequisite/corequisite to encourage adequate student preparation or optimal
program sequencing, or as necessitated by changes in other courses.”
It was noted that the CUC could make a ruling on a course revision if the description was being
changed too much.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
The next meeting will be October 14, 2010, 12:30, Altgeld 225.
Respectfully submitted,
Donna M. Smith