Minutes of the Meeting of the Competency-Based General Education Committee (Approved)
May 22, 2000
Members Present: Greg Aldrete, Lucy Arendt, Teri Berggren, Illene Noppe, Debra Pearson, Brian
Sutton, Sherri Urcavich
Guest: Scott Furlong, Chair, High Impact First Contact Committee
The meeting convened at 10:50 in ES 301.
1. Discussion with Scott Furlong
Scott Furlong summarized work done thus far by the High Impact First Contact Committee, especially in
areas where that work might influence the work of the Competency-Based General Education Committee.
Prof. Furlong stated that his committee seemed likely to advocate increasing the academic content in the
current Introduction to College and making it into a one-credit course, taken (as it is now) the week before
classes begin. Ideally, students who were in the same Intro to College group would then remain together
as a group in taking the Freshman Seminar during their first semester at college, ideally with the same
instructor who led their Intro to College group. Committee members envisioned the Freshman Seminar as
either a two-credit or a three-credit course, with faculty members proposing topics for upcoming seminars
and those topics subject to approval by a governing group of some kind.
A difficult issue for the High Impact First Content Committee, according to Prof. Furlong, was the
relationship of the Freshman Seminar to the overall General Education requirements at UW-Green Bay.
(It was because of the question of this relationship that Prof. Furlong was addressing the CompetencyBased General Education Committee.) The two primary options for the Freshman Seminar seem to be
 to use the Freshman Seminar as a "front door to Gen Ed," preparing the students to do well in
and get the most from their Gen Ed classes, or
 to create Freshman Seminar topics in such a way that any given seminar could satisfy one of the
current Gen Ed requirements.
Notwithstanding a desire not to increase the Gen Ed requirements by three credits, the High Impact First
Content Committee seemed to favor the first of the two options listed above, in large part because the
second option seems to suggest just one more content-driven course, different from other Gen Ed
courses in little more than its smaller enrollment. High Impact First Contact Committee members prefer
that the Freshman Seminar focus mainly on more broad-based learning skills, with specific content
functioning primarily as a vehicle for applying those skills. Thus, rather than focusing primarily on
traditional academic content, the seminar seems likely to focus heavily on reading, writing,
communication, and criticial thinking skills; issues related to "engaging the world" such as citizenship,
diversity, etc.; a general orientation to the University and to the college experience; and the introduction of
the portfolio and the student's personalized learning plan.
Prof. Furlong then fielded questions, with most of the question-and-answer discussion focusing on
transfer students: how many credits they must transfer in before the Freshman Seminar requirement
would be waived for them, whether or not Nursing students would be required to take the Freshman
Seminar, etc. In addition, both Prof. Furlong and Competency-Based General Education Committee
members repeatedly emphasized the need to recruit the best teachers on campus for the Freshman
Seminars, and to cultivate a sense of commitment among those teachers for the goals of General
Education, and not just for their particular academic disciplines.
2. Discussion of Preliminary Outline for Committee Report
After Prof. Furlong left, committee members turned to the issue of what their final report should say. The
committee's previous meeting, May 5, had been largely devoted to brainstorming ideas for the final report,
and after that previous meeting, committee co-chair Illene Noppe had sent the other committee members
a preliminary outline for the final report, based on ideas from the May 5 meeting. Thus, the committee
now began considering this preliminary outline. Among the points made by committee members were
these:
 The committee report will be only advisory; changes in Gen Ed policy must be enacted through
the General Education Council.
 When one considers points on which committee members generally agree, many of these points
largely support or even replicate concepts from the Report of the 1991-92 General Education
Task Force to the General Education Council and the Report of the [1996-97] Task Force on
Upper-Level General Education. Given that a certain amount of repetition seems necessary to
effect change at UW-Green Bay, the committee's final report should in some ways reemphasize
certain suggestions made in those two reports but not yet implemented at the University; it should
also emphasize ways some of our suggestions are attempts to put into action the overall
philosophy expressed in the 1991-92 report.
 Data from the committee's recent survey suggest that current UW-Green Bay Gen Ed
requirements have "gaps" in terms of the General Education Learning Outcomes; that is, students
can complete their Gen Ed requirements without ever taking a course in which certain learning
outcomes are ever dealt with. In large measure, this seems to result from the fact that so many
Gen Ed requirements can be satisfied through courses designed to introduce students to a
specific academic discipline, rather than to designed to examine broader issues and methods
uniting various interdisciplinary clusters. Committee members seemed to feel that courses with
titles such as, for instance, Foundations of Western Culture or Introduction to the Humanities
were more consonant with the goals of the UW-Green Bay General Education program than were
courses with titles such as, for instance, Introduction to American Literature II or Settlement
Geography. In other words, General Education courses in most cases should be as
interdisciplinary in design as possible.
 For Gen Ed to be truly competency-based, we need to assure that procedures such as challenge
exams are in place for those students who wish to satisfy a requirement by demonstrating a
competency without taking one of the courses usually associated with that competency.
 Similarly, UW-Green Bay may wish to consider creating a list of key competencies and requiring
measurable evidence that each graduating student has met each competency, rather than basing
graduation requirements solely on courses completed.
 Committee members agreed that for their next meeting--which will take place on June 5, starting
at 10:45, in ES 301--they will bring specific ideas for material which should be included in Section
I ("What is competency-based general education?") and Section II ("The Assessment of
Competencies") of the committee's final report.
The meeting adjourned at 12:30.
Respectfully submitted
Brian Sutton