College of Arts and Sciences
Council of Chairs
December 8, 2010
2:30 p.m., AS 122
Meeting Minutes
Present: J. Altarriba, J. Brière, G. Broadwell, S. Cohen, A. DeBlasi, R. Fogarty (for Hamm), E. Gaffney, S. Galime,
K. Gersowitz (recorder), D. Goodwin, C. Henck, M. Hill, R. Hoyt, T. Kinal, R. Lachmann, J. Large, M. Lifchitz, A.
Lyons, J. Mandle, M. Messitt, J. Pipkin, R. Rosellini, C. Smith, G. Stevens, M. Sutherland, C. Thorncroft, P.
Toscano, C. Wagner, E. Wulfert, K. Zhu, R. Zitomer.
Introductory Remarks: Dean Wulfert called the meeting to order at 2:30 p.m.
Minutes of November 17, 2010: A motion to approve the minutes was made by R. Zitomer, seconded by A. Lyons.
The meeting minutes for November 7, 2010 were unanimously approved with one minor revision.
2. Announcements

Cases for Promotion ONLY due 12/15/10 from Department to Dean for decision by 08/31/11

Intersession Energy Savings Initiative
(Limited Operations 12/22/10-1/2/11-Dean’s Office will be closed; Energy Conservation 12/18/10-12/21/10 and 1/3/11-1/13/11)

Departmental Planning Meetings will be scheduled in advance of construction of Fall 2011 schedule of classes

Nominations for President's Award for Undergraduate Research are due 3/7/11 (Dona Parker, AS 217)
Faculty Participation Requested:

Thank you to all who made the December commencement a success!
New Business: Report of the General Education Task Force (Fall 2010)
Dean Wulfert reported that she recently spoke with Senate leadership about the need for more time for CAS to evaluate and provide input regarding the Gen Ed Task Force report. She considered this essential because CAS provides 90% of the Gen Ed instruction on campus. Associate Dean Pipkin, the Dean’s representative on the Task
Force, agreed and has also advocated for additional time for thoughtful discussion on the proposed changes.
At the first Council of Chairs meeting in January, Dean Wulfert would like to invite Steve North, Chair of the Task
Force, to provide an overview of the proposed changes and hear Chairs’ reactions. If possible, the Dean hopes that the Chairs will have the opportunity to work through the proposed changes with their faculty before this meeting.
She requested that the Chairs prepare a written feedback summary in response to the proposed changes and send it to
Associate Dean Pipkin (with cc to her). CAS can then produce a document by which we can weigh in more formally on the proposed plan.
Associate Dean Pipkin provided the Council with a brief summary of the report. He noted that CAS was well represented on the Task Force (S. North, English, Chair; R. Zitomer, Biology; A. DeBlasi, East Asian Studies; A.
Lyons, Theatre; L. Bickmore, Anthropology; M. Hildebrand, Math; R. Keesee, Atmospheric and Environmental
Sciences.) He believes that the Task Force has successfully clarified, simplified and reduced the burden of General
Education (pp. 13 and 14 of the report compares the current and proposed Gen Ed requirements). One purpose was to make Gen Ed more integral to the major by devolving oral discourse, information literacy, critical thinking and upper division writing entirely to departments, and by affording leeway in how each discipline approaches them.
For example, upper division writing is now defined as “disciplinary writing” and is likely to take very different forms in different departments. Another goal of the Task Force was to align its recommendations with those of other reports including the report on the First-Year Experience, the Middle States Self-Study, and the Strategic Plan. A

2 final overarching goal was to make the new requirements unique to the University at Albany by specifically requiring courses under a new “World Within Reach” category. Associate Dean Pipkin noted that the Task Force did not revisit the detailed learning objectives of the categories themselves. In some cases this may be appropriate and will in fact be necessary for the in-the-major components. The proposed new requirements are summarized on p.
3 of the Report.
One important change involves the delivery of the lower-division writing component. The proposal gears the writing component to freshmen, who will take either Introduction to Writing or first-year seminars. This approach engages students in writing early in their academic careers, which the literature indicates is important. It was acknowledged that there is an opportunity cost to putting full-time faculty in front of small classes of freshmen.
Also, funding will need to be available to support the Introduction to Writing courses.
Notably, the proposed plan collapses the arts and humanities into one category and reduces the requirement from 6 to 3 credits. Requirements in the natural and social sciences have been decreased from 6 credits per category to 3 credits. U.S. Historical Perspectives, Europe, and Regions Beyond Europe are now combined in one category with a decrease from 9 overall to 3 credits. The foreign language requirement, which has not changed substantially, was formulated before the announcement of suspending admissions to the French, Italian, and Russian programs. The
Task Force elected not to change the proposed plan as a result of the announcement. The Mathematics requirement remains the same (3 credits). Global and Cross-Cultural Studies and U.S. Diversity and Pluralism would now fall under the category of the World Within Reach with a total of 6 credits (unchanged). World Within Reach courses are considered the capstone to the Gen Ed program.
The discussion turned to funding the proposed plan. R. Zitomer agreed that the challenge to addressing the writing component would be expensive but it is essential if we are to address the issue. The proposed changes cannot be achieved unless funding is available to support these writing classes. He noted that the World Within Reach classes would be mounted by departments from across campus, not just CAS. It was noted that the Introduction to Writing classes fall outside of CAS. He also noted that the Task Force was mindful of financial concerns but was charged with using their best professional judgment in developing the best program possible. A. DeBlasi added that there is the possibility of phasing in this portion of the plan if necessary due to financial constraints.
R. Lachmann expressed the concern that the University would not have the funds to hire instructors and would expect the Departments to mount the freshmen courses. This would force departments to increase enrollments in mid-level courses to free faculty to teach the small freshmen classes.
J. Brière noted that in the first two semesters foreign language classes are usually 4 credits. Some EAS language courses are 5 credits.
M. Lifchitz expressed concern about creating another entity to run these writing courses. Although the idea of small sections for freshmen is good, what about the FTEs departments generate from lower level courses? These courses allow them to mount classes with smaller numbers at the higher levels for majors. This could be problematic in the survival of some departments.
C. Thorncroft asked for clarification on what the Task Force envisioned in upper level science courses in the World
Within Reach category. Current courses taught by his department would not be appropriate for students outside of the major.
Associate Dean Pipkin stated that the goal of the Task Force was to make the Gen Ed program here distinctive by providing students the opportunity to put their Gen Ed knowledge to use in a mature, intellectual fashion. Freshmen do not have the maturity to do this, but by the time students are juniors and seniors they are more intellectually sophisticated. R. Zitomer gave the example of students now being able to read the New York Times and having a

3 broad understanding of the world. They now have the ability to look at an issue (e.g., World Food Crisis) and understand the topic, including how individuals within the discipline discuss the issue.
S. Cohen questioned how the World Within Reach, which originated as a brand, became an academic goal?
Associate Dean Pipkin answered that just because it is a brand this does not necessarily disqualify it from being useful in fashioning something unique to Albany. He clarified that if only one major is declared, then at least one
World Within Reach course must be taken outside of the major.
M. Hill commented that the new proposal would substantially change the Gen Ed courses offered by the English
Department. He is concerned that the new proposal might see departments competing for Gen Ed courses. He noted that combining the arts and humanities categories was a significant change. D. Goodwin agreed and noted he believes it is important for students to develop a breadth of knowledge in these two areas. A. Lyons noted that the current requirement of 6 credits can be taken in an either/or fashion, which means that a student can take all 6 credits in the humanities and none in art. S. Cohen expressed concern that the proposed change to the arts requirement gives the impression that the arts are being written out. A. Broadwell also expressed concerns with the implementation of the plan. Dean Wulfert noted that there might not be an incentive for the larger departments to develop World Within Reach courses, but she could envision the smaller departments developing interesting, interdisciplinary offerings.
J. Mandle questioned how the World Within Reach courses, which would be developed for students from other majors and focus on a broad global topic, could qualify as 300-level courses. Associate Dean Pipkin noted the purpose of the course is to allow students to deploy their knowledge from other fields in a synthesized manner and to think as engaged, intelligent citizens. J. Brière noted these courses could be easier to develop in some disciplines.
Old Business:
Dean Wulfert addressed J. Brière who earlier in the day had emailed the Chairs his comments about the current budget situation, particularly as it affects LLC, and noted that she was not included in the distribution. She requested that she be copied on correspondence that refers to her, so that she may respond as necessary. She noted that current communications have been misleading and that she therefore would like the opportunity to set the record straight.
As examples she noted that recent correspondence characterized the participation from the Chairs in the budget reduction exercise as taking place in “emergency mode” only, when in fact the Chairs were apprised throughout the year of the looming budget crisis. She took objection to the statement that she had “artificially” excluded natural attrition data in her budget model. She reminded the Chairs that, although some might disagree with the strategy, all
Deans had been instructed to use only one year of natural attrition in preparing their budget cut plans; the cuts in the second year had to be made strategically, based on the recommendations of all the planning groups, including the
Chairs Council. She closed by emphasizing that she had involved the Chairs in the decision-making process as best she could, given the constraints she faced, and that she took objection to J. Brière’s email that this process had not been transparent.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00.
Handouts:
Minutes of November 17, 2010 meeting
Agenda
New Board of Trustees Mandate on General Education, January 2010
Report of the General Education Task Force Fall 2010