Liberal Education Reform Team
April 11, 2008, 12:40 p.m.
Reeve 221
Attended: Franca Barricelli, Karen Bowen, Katherine Chase, Lisa Danielson, J. Kim DeDee, Nick Dvorcek, Mike Eierman, Linda Eroh, Kate Faggiani, Jim Feldman, Charles Gibson, Jonathan Gutow,
John Koker, Todd Kostman, Diane Kromm, Alice Kyburg, David Jones, Kathy Lynch, Roberta Maguire, Susanne Marnocha, Susan Nuernberg, Barb Rau, Abby Schultz, Breck Speers, Rebecca Spurlock,
Lori Worm
AGENDA TOPIC
RESPONSIBLE
DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ACTIONS/FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
PARTY
Progress on
Susan
Susan Nuernberg reported that LERT has been on the agenda of every department in the university
department
Nuernberg
except 2. The Faculty Subcommittee was commended on the excellent job they have done trying to
meetings.
reach each department.
Feedback from
Susan
A summary of the Learning Outcomes feedback from all the meetings conducted by the
Subgroups are asked to email one to three
Subcommittee
Nuernberg
subcommittees was distributed (see copy below). It was proposed that LERT review and either
suggestions for incorporating the suggestions (or
approve the suggestions for future work, or delete the suggestion. For those items that are approved,
recommend not to incorporate at all) to Susan
subgroups will be formed to work on integrating them into the current Learning Outcomes.
Nuernberg by 4/21/08.
Attendees were asked to identify any other missing outcomes that had come up from the meetings.
Susan will compile the suggestions and have them
Kate Faggiani proposed added technology understand to the list of “What’s Missing?” from the LERT
ready for the full group to consider at the May 2
Outcomes. Roberta Maguire noted there was feedback from English to specifically include service in
meeting.
presentations.
the language. They also questioned what is meant by “integrative learning.”
Leadership. There was general agreement that a subgroup should be formed to explore how to
incorporate this into the Learning Outcomes.
Sustainability. Jonathan Gutow questioned whether sustainability rises to the same level of the other
outcomes and really has its own conceptual foundation. Jim Feldman spoke in favor of including
sustainability as a unique outcome. It was agreed that a subgroup should look at this to decide if there
was a way to incorporate sustainability into the Learning Outcomes.
Global Citizenship, Diversity. After some discussion of the distinction between global issues and
diversity, the co-captains agreed that they would take a look at how to rephrase to incorporate each
concept.
Foundations. Alice Kyburg raised this topic on behalf of the philosophy department. There was
discussion as to whether ensuring students are skilled in identifying theoretical/foundational
assumptions that define one’s perspective can be identified as a separate skill than Intellectual and
Practical Skills. It was decided that this issue is worth exploring in a subgroup.
Methodologies. It was felt that learning under a variety of methodologies should be incorporated into
the Guiding Principles.
Financial Literacy. It was generally felt that financial literacy, while important, is on a different, more
defined level that the other Learning Outcomes. The team agreed that we should try to find a way to
incorporate these skills, perhaps through the assessment process, but that they probably fall under the
category of Intellectual and Practical Skills (e.g., quantitative literacy and intellectual/practical skills).
Service. It was felt that service was incorporated under engagement.
Technology. It was agreed that technology in the broader sense (i.e., knowledge, skills necessary to
operate in a technologically advanced society) should go to a subgroup for discussion on where to
incorporate it into the Learning Outcomes.
Sign-up sheets were distributed to form the subgroups to address numbers 1, 2, 3, 4,
Susan announced that we are also looking for a subgroup to help the co-chairs develop some guiding
principles for the May meeting.
and 8 above.
Subcommittee
Subcommittee
Admissions/Outreach
Reports
Chairs
 Concerns were raised at their meeting with respect to how these outcomes would be carried
through and whether faculty would support them when the time for changes came. They also
asked about the timeline for changes
Other Business
Susan announced that UW Oshkosh had been selected to send a team to the AACU workshop in
Open forums to present the Learning Outcomes to
Boston to think about next steps toward implementation. Mike Eierman, Todd Kostman, John Koker,
the campus are scheduled for April 28 and May 1,
Susan Nuernberg, Roberta Maguire and Linda Eroh will be attending. There will be participants from
both at 3:00 pm in Reeve Union 214. LERT Team
34 campuses across the country to talk about learning outcomes and implementation. UW System is
Members are encouraged to attend one or both of
also sending a team.
these sessions.
John Koker announced that UW System is having a system-wide meeting to discuss common learning
outcomes for all UW institutions. President Riley wants to discuss whether it is possible for the
campuses to agree on 3-5 broad learning outcomes. This meeting will take place at the Madison
Concourse Hotel on Tuesday, 4/22 from 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. and is being hosted by Rebecca
Martin, Senior Vice President.
Adjournment/Items
The next meeting is Friday, May 2, 2008, 12:40 p.m. Location to be announced. Agenda items
for Next Agenda
include: Continued discussion of Learning Outcomes and begin discussion of Guiding Principles.
Barbara Rau, Recorder
Adjourned at 1:37 p.m.
Feedback from LERT Presentations (From Departments, Programs, and Individuals)
A. What’s Missing?
1. Leadership: “From our perspective, more classes and emphasis focused on leadership and management…University graduates
should be seen not only as technical experts in their specific fields, but leaders in the community as well.” (ROTC)
2. Sustainability:
The current statement on the university’s core values already does so, in its “Social Awareness and Responsiveness” value:
“explore and engage the challenges that confront regional, national and global communities, using their intellectual and creative
capabilities to understand, investigate and solve problems. Social awareness will allow us to respond to domestic and international
needs for equitable and sustainable societies.”
Working the concept of sustainability into the Essential Learning Outcomes would help personalize these outcomes to the
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. (Environmental Studies and Campus Sustainability Council)
3. Global Citizenship, Diversity: I would like to see…some more language added to the statement that signify college education
providing experiences that help develop more wholesome humans as member of global citizenship in the rapidly globalizing world,
which is also relating to the increased awareness of diversity, social change, and inequalities. After all, I believe this is ultimately a
sustainability issue at the matter of human well-being, not only environmental, but also the social, political, and cultural in order to
contribute to constructing the world in ways that can be more sustainable/livable in harmony with differences among each other.
(Individual)
4. Foundations: “Students should be skilled in identifying theoretical/foundational assumptions that define perspectives, whether
philosophical, cultural, or religious."(Individual)
5. Methodologies: Students should have exposure to many methodologies as a part of their liberal education. Distribution requirements
currently take care of this need, but if we get rid of them then we might want the Essential Learning Outcomes to incorprate this
requirement. (Individual)
B. What to Delete or Modify?
1.
The following suggestions are intended to provide a list of several potential alternatives for working the concept of sustainability
into the LEAP version of the Essential Learning Outcomes.
1. Revise the first outcome to read: “Knowledge of Human Cultures, the Physical and Natural World, and Sustainability”. Thus
the knowledge is not simply about how things are but also includes the “needs for equitable and sustainable societies” (from the
university’s Core Values).
2. Add to the list of skills in the second outcome, “literacy in sustainability”. We also discussed a requirement in “environmental
literacy,” but we believe that sustainability is a broader, more inclusive, and more appropriate concept. It is not uncommon for
other universities to have environmental literacy requirements. But very few have worked sustainability into this kind of
document. This could be another chance for UW Oshkosh to play a leading role.
3. Revise the third outcome to read “Personal, Social, and Environmental Responsibility.” These outcomes already profess to
teach about the natural world; what kind of responsibility comes with that knowledge?
An alternative method to develop the notion of responsibility in the third outcome would be to specify some of the real-world
challenges to which the knowledge and skills can be applied: ‘Anchored through active involvement with diverse communities
and real world challenges such as social justice, environmental responsibility, and economic well-being.” (Environmental Studies
and Campus Sustainability Council)
2. “I would like to delete the notion of values because I don’t think we are in the business of teaching values.” (Individual)
3. Delete History from first learning outcome – it is a part of social sciences on this campus. (Individual)
C. Other Recommendations
1. Split the first learning outcome into two, so that it would be “Knowledge of human cultures” and second separate outcome would be
“Knowledge of the Physical and Natural World.” (Biology)
2. Each outcome is worded in a simple and concise manner making it easier for students to internalize. Ideally, we would like these
values/outcomes to be more than a university policy in a memorandum, but character building values that students can internaize
throughout a lifetime of service.” (ROTC)
3. “Ensure that general educational requirements for any degree require an exposure to Math, Science, Social Sciences, and
Languages. Well-rounded exposure to various subjects fosters a mind that is open to differing points of view when analyzing and
negotiating life’s challenges.” (ROTC)