Present:
Official
COMMITTEE ON GENERAL EDUCATION AND
INTERCOLLEGIATE PROGRAMS
Minutes of the February 11, 2015 Meeting
Becky Swearingen, RFT; Tom Altena, KIN; Jack Llewellyn, REL; Ben Timson, BMS; Joe
Hughes, MCL; and Rich Biagioni, CHM; Josh Smith, BMS- Provost Office Rep; Xiaomin
Qiu, GGP; Alex Hamwi, MKT; Steven Hinch, RFT; and Keri Franklin, Assessment Office;
Rhonda Ridinger for Sharmistha Self; Dan Kaufman, PHI; and Michele Granger, MGT
Not present: Darryl Clark, TD
Guest: Rachelle Darabi, Provost Office; Telory Davies, THE; Patrick Scott, ECO; Pam Sailors,
CHPA; Alexander Wait, CNAS; and Jordan Schanda, ENV MGMT
I.
CALL TO ORDER
Becky Swearingen called the meeting to order at 3:37 p.m.
II.
OLD BUSINESS
Minutes from the December 4, 2014 meeting were reviewed. Joe Hughes moved to approve the minutes; Dan Kaufman seconded the motion. All approved; motion carried.
THE 200: Becky Swearingen gave the overview of her review. She stated her concerns with the proposal. Joe Hughes moved to accept the proposal. Dan Kaufman seconded the motion.
There was discussion on disconnect of general goals and SLOs. Telory Davies discussed why she included items in the SLOs. It was discussed that general goal 7 needed to be addressed. Joe and Dan retracted their motion. Tom Altena moved to deny the proposal; Joe Hughes seconded the motion. There was further discussion. All approved; motion carried.
III.
NEW BUSINESS
Proposal Change
Gender Studies Minor: Pam Sailors gave an overview of the proposal. Joe Hughes moved to approve, Michelle Granger seconded the motion. All approved; motion carried.
New Interdisciplinary Program
Sustainability: An overview was given by Alexander Wait. Ben Timson moved to approve; Jack Llewellyn seconded the motion; there was discussion. All approved; motion carried.

1.
Periodic Review of Gen Ed Courses: The periodic review of general education’s courses was discussed. It was stated that the periodicity would be on a four year cycle. The handout was discussed and the timeline was presented. It was questioned if courses volunteer to be in the first review would they miss the review or would they be reviewed with their own area. Josh
Smith stated that even three years was hard for courses to stay on track. He suggested that they get feedback as they go through the process which would be beneficial. Tom Altena moved and Joe Hughes seconded an amendment that the courses still follow the timeline even if they volunteer and this would be included in the FAQ. Jack Llewellyn moved and Joe Hughes seconded to approve the Proposal for the periodic review with amendments. Those amendments are: to remove the “…” located at the end of the paragraph on page 5 in FAQ number 4 and adding Fall 2019/Spring 2020 Courses in Breadth of Knowledge: Public Affairs will participate in Periodic Review to the timeline even if they volunteered for review. Becky will also add FAQs as discussed: 12. If there are concerns identified during the review process, what happens? The course will be put on a probationary status for one year and will resubmit their materials in the following year for a new review. 13. Will the courses that participate in the pilot program be allowed to skip their first review year? Courses that participate in the pilot program will be reviewed during their regularly schedule academic year. 14. Will specific criteria be developed which will be utilized during the review process and be shared prior to the beginning of the review process? The pilot course process will be the development of specific criteria will allow CGEIP to refine the criteria that will be utilized during the review process. The course coordinators of the courses in the pilot program and CGEIP committee members will work together to develop a set of criteria for the review process. These criteria then will be disseminated to the course coordinators and department heads.
It was suggested to look at a few courses from each section each year versus just one section each year. Discussion continued on how to compare and course review processes. It was decided that the changes would be made and be sent to the committee members via electronic vote.
Bachelor of General Studies Review Committee: The Bachelor of General Studies was discussed and Rachelle Darabi stated that there were already twenty people inquiring, which were a number of MSU employees. It was requested that there needed to be a subcommittee to review the applicants. It was suggested that there be three members including the chair to look at the applicants for the general studies degree. Tom Altena and Steve Hinch both volunteered to serve on the subcommittee.
Keri Franklin announced the General Education Conference would be held next week and asked that members who want to attend, to let her know.
Tom Altena moved to adjourn and Joe Hughes seconded motion. The meeting adjourned at 4:46 p.m.