Kev.':J/LU1't
REQUEST FOR
ADDI 10
OF NEW COURSE
. /
-
';)I'"
FORMA
/~~rSTR.Anve
1-"'
, f i
Effective: '"
'A
??ljr
I
Department Oceanography and Coastal Sciences
Date October 2,2014
PROPOSED COURSE DESCRIPTION
Rubric &
No.
~ oes
1010
I Title
I
Introduction to Coastal Environmental Science
Short Title ($ 19 characters) I N
IT
10 I
C
10
IA
Is
IT
IN
V
I
Semester Hours of Credit 1
I
If combination course type, # hrs. of credit for
Repeat Credit Max. (if repeatable):
Lecture:
- credit hours
Lab/Sem/ ec: _ _
I
Graduate Credit?
I_yes
ILNo
Credit will not be given for this course and:
Lecture 1 Lab
Lee/Lab
!
Resflnd _ _ Clin/Pract _ _
Maximum enrollment per section: (use integer, e.g. 25 not 20-30)
Grading System: Letter Grade X Pass/Fail __ Final Exam:** Yes X
**(Attach justification if the proposed course will not hold a final exam during examination week.)**
No
Course Descr,i,ption:
(Concise catalog statement exactly as you wish it to appear in the General Catalog}
OCS 1010 Introduction to Coastal Environmental Science (l)Ale,o
~
0.
~ ~~I
Global view of coastal issues with a focus on the Gulf Of Mexlco and deltaic areas around the world \ 0\0.
BUDGET IMPACT (IF ANSWER TO ANY QUESTION IS "YES", ATTACH EXPLANATION.
If this course is approved, will additional staff be needed?
Will additional space, equipment, special library materials or other major expense be involved?
Academic Affairs Approval:
ATTACHMENTS (ATTACH THE FOLLOWING TO YOUR PROPOSAL)
Yes
Yes
I
No X
No X
JUSTIFICATION: Justification must explain why tltis course is needed and how it fits into the curricula. wm the course dupJicate other courses?
SYLLABUS: Including 14 week outline of the subject matter; titles of text, lab manual, andJor required readings; grading scale and criteria
(For 4000·level, specify graduate student grading criteria if reqUirements differ for graduate and undergraduate students).
APPROVALS
Department Faculty Approval Date
(Date)
Department Chair Signature
Graduate Dean Signature
College Contact

Justification E VS/OCS 1010 he Coastal Environmental Science Major in the School of the Coast &
Enviro ent is a relatively new program (-6 years old) a d as been successfully growing from a few students the first year to ov r 100 students now. In our effo s to improve retentio in th program, we have develo e a
0 e credjt course that s udents will be encouraged t take in their first year to introduce the to the C major, outline areas of researc , discus job opport i ies and hiring trend in the field, and familiarize the students with the wide array of research and educational
0 p rtunities t at are available to them during their undergraduate years. hi cour e will Iso introduce students to research methodologies used i the cientific study of coastal e viron e ts, estuaries, wetlands and deltai re ions.
This new co rse fulfills two major directives on campus as well as enhancing the CES degree program. First this course will help the retention of undergraduate students in the School of the Cast &
Environment, a d second, this course will be the first step in the developme of a curricular transformation for the campus-wide LSU
Discover progra (introductio to research methodologies).

Course ylLabns
OCS 1010 - Introduction to Coastal Enviro ental Science
Fall 2015
Locatio: to be assigned
Time: Wednesdays 12:00 pm- 12:50 pm
Instructors:
Dr. John R. White
Phone: 578-8792
Dr. Sibel Bargu Ates
Phone: 578-0029 office: 3239 Energy Coast and Environment Bldg email: jrwhite@lsu.edu office: 1235 Energy Coast and Environment Bldg email: sbargu@Jsu.edu
Office Hours: Offic hours are Friday from 9-10 am. Other times are availabl by appointment
Format: One 1 hr lecture, once a week
Textbook: Not required. Moodie will be used to provide lecture topics, most reading assignments, or any homework assignments. Moodle-linked e-mail will be used for general course co unication.
Course Objectiv : This cour e win provide a global view of coastal i sues with a specific focus on the Gulf of M xico and deltaic areas around the world. It will also introduce rodents to
CES faculty and th ir research focus and provide infonnation on career paths for CES students.
Student Learning Objectives:
(SLOt) Students will be abl to discu a wid array of issue related to the coastal zone
(SL02) Students will be able to identify the research opportunities available in the chool of
Coast and Environment.
Assignments and Class Activities: All as ignments and readings will be posted in MoodIe and announced in class as well. Readings are to be completed prior to lecture unless oth rwise specified by the instructor.
Specific assignment: Half a pag writ -ups for each of the three scien· c areas presented that students might be interested - Assignment will be given in week 9 and will be submitted to
. structor in we 10.

Assessment - Grade distribution
1) Attendance and participation in clas activities
2) Half a page write-ups on three areas you might be inte sted in
3) Final exam
Grading Scale:
A 90-100
B 80-89
C 70-79
D 60-69
F 0-59
40%
30%
30%

Weeks
1
2
Research
3
4
To ics to be
COy
How to succeed in College
Class Activity - team building
-E vironme
Coastal Issues - Overview
5
6
7
8
Physical Processes
Trophic Levels: Plankton to Humans
Wetlands and Estuari s
Environmental Issues
Environmental Modeling
9
10
Socio-economi and Policy Issues
Essay: Half a page write-ups for each of the three areas you might be interested­
Due week 10
Class Acti .
tv
Class discussions on previously written essays to explore these options
Careen in Coastal Environmental Science(to iIlel.de gil leetares who are working in these areas)
9 Academia and Professional Schools
13
14
15
10 Governmental Jobs (state and federal)
11 Environmental Consulting Industry/ ther Private Sector Jobs
Research Opportuni· in ~~.:::IO
12 Laboratory and field research, volunteer activities, re earc for credit,
UROP program national summer programs, internships
Class . c s ion, final evaluation of the material covered
Final Exam

I
Rev. 1/2015
Req fo
HA
Department Environmental SOences
: .fllIbI! a. ENVS 7043
Exls,t1ng C
FOR C

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
ENVS / R R 7043 Environmental Lawand egulation
JUSTIFICATION:
Adding this course to the RNR rubric will ake it more accessible and desirable to RNR graduate students.
Dr. Michael Kaller clarifies this issue in hi recent email (attached to this application and quoted here):
"The importance of the RNR rubric to the graduate students is really about professional certification after graduation. Students avoid classes that will not apply toward the certifications. Many tudents, specifically those oriented toward forestry an wildlife careers and les those oriented toward fisheries and wetland careers, are interested in being recognized by their professional societies as a certified forester or certified wildlife scientist.
For foresters, certification is important for employment with state agencie or forming a con ulting forestry firm. For wildlife students, some states require certification and other states financially reward certified employees. Certification for all societies requires a review of transcripts, and the recently graduated students have the burden to establish that the ourses fit th categories. Usually, the societies recognize cour e descriptions (e.g., Wildlife Techniques is the des ription used by most universities) or recognized the rubrics
(e.g., WiLD or WMAN or WFMGT are commo y used rubrics across universities). When rubrics or descriptions are not recognized, the students have additional burdens.
I was not on the faculty when the FISH, FOR, and WILD rubrics were combined into RNR However I did inherit the some of the paperwork. The professional societi s were informed by letter about the change. There wa extensive correspondence from what I understand, and it appeared to be difficult to convince the societies that the n w RNR XXXX was the same as the former WILD XXXX or FISH XXXX. Moreover, our recent wildlife hires insist that The Wildlife Society, in partic r, is becoming more skeptical of general rubrics, like BIOL or RNR or
ENVS, where the courses may not be taught by wildlife scientists (presumably, a Wll.-D rubric omehow guarantees this would happen?). Therefore, the concern lies in convincing the profe sional societie that an
ENVS rubric may be plugged into their course matrix for certification. Our new hire , both wildlife scientists, will not be advising their students into any rubric that may cause problems for certification. They have een very convincing, and other faculty seem to be going along. Therefore, we are looking at 5-6 faculty, who would account for 20-30 graduate students (our largest group), who would not participat . I would bet that the forestry faculty would participate, but they acc un for far fewer graduate tudents. Among the fish and wetland faculty, the rubric is a non-issue, but again we (l am a fish and invertebrate ecologist) account for fewer students (under 30). ~
Additional notes:
The course has room for more students and the addition of RNR graduate students will only strengthen the overall emollment. The course is also offered as a LAW course, and the in tructor believes the classroom environment is enhanced greatly by teaching LAW, ENVS, and RNR students in the same classroom.
CURRICULUM:
At present, this course is not included as a required course in any curriculum, and is an optional course for graduate students.

Rev, 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
Correspondence regarding this course change:
From: Christopher F D'Elia
Sent: Thursday, December 04,20143:43 PM
To: Michael D Kaller; Blake Hudson
Subject: RE: ENVSIRNR course proposals
Mike. OK with me. Chris.
From: Blake Hudson
Sent: Thu 12/4/20148:48 PM
To: Michael D Ka er; Christopher F D'Elia
Subject: RE: ENVSIRNR course proposals
Chris, the reason I went fon~ard with this is because I have Illy had one RNR student in 3 yeal enroll in the ENV
COUIS s I teach.
0
(thoueht IDee there i. n competiti
D. to peak. it ould e g d to creak R R numb rs for the COlif e' so we can reach even more people on campus. y law cla. 'es have benefited greatly from having graduate per~pecti, es and I think having more in there will be a b n fit to both the law and tile ENVS tud nts.
Thank !
BLIUCE Hun O~
BURU GTON RESOLRCE PROFE OR It ENVTR01'.ME T!\L
L \\\
Eow
RD 1. WOMAC, JR. PROFES 'OR IN
E .
RGY
L '\ \
J
TNT ApPOl 1E'T
L
LAWCE, TER
LSU SCIIOOL OF THE OAST A. '0 • v1RO ·re T
,pIO I s
R.~ I TW1TTER
1 EAST CAMP S DRfVE, OFFI 'E 436
LOUlSlA A STATE UNIVERSITY
BATO ROUGC, LA 70803
(225) 57g-4064
From: Michael D KaUer
Sent: Thursday, December 04 20143:38 PM
To: Blake Hudson
Cc: Christopher F D'Elia
Subject: ENVS/RNR course proposals
Hello Blake,
Could you send me a memo indicating that you wish to cross-list your courses with RNR to increase

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course opportunities for students? One memo will suffice, if it lists the three courses. This is the final item that I need for the proposals.
have cc'd Dean D'Elia to indicate that I will send the ENVSIRNR cro -listing proposals forward to the College C&C committee once I have the memo. Wouldn't hurt to have an e­ mail from him too.
Mike Kaller, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and
Curriculum Coordinator,
School of Renewable Natural Resources
Associate Rector,
Agriculture Residence College
From: Blake Hudson
Sent: Tue 10/28/2014 12:27 PM
To: Michael D Kaller
Subject: Syllabi
Mike. it just stm k me that I mayor may not have 'ent you the three
COllI e yllabi that l hop
Ne can create R Olunbers for. In case I dilln 't. her they are.
Environmental Law and P licy
International Environmental la\,; and Policy atural Resourc s Law and Poucy (<I paper dass/seminarso I have also attached the paper
\VritiIlg info.)
BLAK£HuD 0
BURLINGTON RESOURl'E PROFESSOR E iVIRO ME'lTAL. LAW
EDWARDJ. W MAC JR. PROFE 'SOR IN E ERGY LAW
JorNT APPOrNT 1~,
'T,
A (T" PROFE SOR
LSU LA W CE TER
L U
SCHOOL OF THE CO. 'T AND
E.
VIROl'\MENT
BID
SSRN
TWITTER
1 EAST CAMPUS DRJ E. OFFICE 436
L UI IA A TATE UNIVERSITY
B TO ROUGE, LA 70 03
(225) 578-4064

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
ct:
I
~~
Michael 0 Kaller <mkalle1@lsu.edu>
To: Lawrence J ouse <lrouse@lsu.edu>, Blake Hudson <blake.hudson@law.lsu.edu>
Cc: monster77 <monster77@aol.com>; Kevin L Armbrust <armbrust@lsu.edu>
Dat e: Wed, Mar 4,20154:26 pm
Hello Blake, Larry, Vince, and Kevin,
The importance of the RNR rubric to the graduate students i really about professional certification after graduation. Students avoid classe that will not apply toward the certifications. Many students, specifically tho e oriented toward forestry and wildlife careers and less those oriented toward fisheries and wetland career ,are intere ted in being recognized by their professional societies as a certified forester or certified wildlife scientist. For foresters, certification is important for employment with state agencies or forming a consulting forestry firm. For wildlife students, some states require certification and other states fmancially reward certified employees. Certification for all societies requires a review of transcripts, and the recently graduated students have the burden to establish that the courses fit the categories. Usually, the societies recognize course descriptions (e.g., Wildlife Techniques is

Rev.9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course the description used by most universiti s) or recogniz d the rubrics (e.g., WILD or WMAN or
WFMGT are commonly used rubrics a ros' universities). When rubrics or descriptions are not recognized, the students have additional burdens.
I was not on the faculty when the FISH, FOR, and WILD rubrics were combined into RNR.
However, I did inherit the some of the paperwork. The professional societies w re informed by letter about the change. There was extensive correspondence from what I understand and it appeared to be difficult to convince the societies that the new RNR XXXX was the same as the former WILD XXXX or FISH XXXX. Moreover, our recent wildlife hires insist hat The
Wildlife Society, in particular, is beco 'ng more skeptical of general rubrics, like BIOL or
RNR or ENVS, where the courses may not be taugh by wildlife scientists (presumably a
WILD rubric somehow guarantees this would happen?). Therefore, the concern lies in convincing the professional societies that an ENVS rubric may be plugged into their course matrix for certification. Our new hires, both wildlife scientists, will not be advising their students into any rubric that may cause problems for certification. They have been very convincing, and other faculty seem to be going along. Therefore, we are lookin at 5-6 faculty, who would account for 20-30 graduate students (our largest group), who would not participate. I would bet that the forestry faculty would participate, but they account for far fewer graduate students. Among the fish and wetland faculty, the rubric is a non-issue, but again we (I am a fish and invertebrate ecologist) account for fewer students (under 30). ike KaUer, Ph.D.
As ociate Professor and
Curriculum Coordinator,
School of Renewable Natural Resources
Associate Rector,
Agriculture Residence College

Rev. /2lil!:
ReqUltlt for
CH GI G
....nm"
<.DUJrlIe ontod E.m,
I

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
ENVS I RNR 7046 International Environmental Law
JUSTIFICATION:
Adding this course to the RN rubric will make it more accessible and desirable to RNR graduate students.
Dr. Michael Kaller clarifies this issue in his recent email (attached to this application and quoted here):
"The importance of the RNR rubric to the graduate students is really about profes ional ertification after graduation. Students avoid classes that will not ap ly toward the certifications. Many students, specifically those oriented toward forestry and wildlife careers and less those oriented toward fisheries nd wetland careers are interested in being recognized by their professional ocieties as a certified forester or certified wildlife scienti t.
For foresters, certification is important for empLoyment with state agencies or fonning a consulting forestry firm. For wildlife students, some states require certification and other states financially reward rtified employees. Certification for all societies requires a review of transcripts, and the recently graduated stud nts have the burden to establish that the courses fit the cat gories. Usually, the societies recognize course descriptions (e.g., Wildlife Techniques is the description used by most universities) or recognized the rubrics
(e.g., WILD or WMAN or WFMGT are commonly used rubrics across universities). When rubrics or descriptions are not recognized, the students have additional burdens.
I was not on the faculty when the FISH, FOR, and WlLD rubrics were combined into RNR. However I did inherit the some of the paperwork. The professional societies were infonned by letter about th hange. There was extensive correspondence from what I un erstand, and it appear d to be difficult to convince the societie Lhat Lhe new RNR XXXX was the same as the former WILD XXXX or FISH XXXX. Moreover our recent wildlife hires insist that The Wildlife Society, in particular, is becoming more skeptical of general rubrics, like BIOL or RNR or
ENVS, where the courses may not be taught by wildlife scientists (presumably, a WILD rubric somehow guarantees this would happen?). Therefore, th concern lies in convincing the professional societies at an
ENVS rubric may be plugged into their course matri fo certification. Our new hires both wildlife scientists, will not be advising their students into any rubric that may cause problems for certification. They have been very convincing, and other faculty seem to be going along. Therefore, we are looking at 5-6 faculty, who would account for 20-30 graduate students (our largest group), who would not participate. I would bet that the forestry faculty would participate, but they account for far fewer graduate students. Among the fish and wetland faculty, the rubric is a non-issue, but again we (l am a fish and invertebrate ecologist) account for fewer students (under 30). "
Additional notes:
The course has room for more students and the addition of RNR graduate students will only trengthen the ov rall enrollment. The course is also offered as a LAW course, and the in tmctor believe the classroom environment is enhanced greatly by teaching LAW, ENVS, and RNR students in the arne classroom.
CURRICULUM:
At present, this course is not included as a required course in any curriculum, and is an optional course for graduate students.

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
Correspondence:
From: Christopher F D'Elia
Sent: Thursday, December 04,20143:43 PM
To: Michael D KaUer; Blake Hud on
Subject: RE: ENVSIRNR course proposals ike, K v.. ilh m . Chri·.
From: Blake Hudson
Sent: Thu 12/4/20148:48 PM
To: Michael D KaUer; Christopher F D'Elia
Subject: RE: ENVS/RNR course proposals hri., the rea-on I v.enl1of\\iard .... ith tillS is be<:311. e I hme onl, had one R R tud\;nt in 3 year enroll
In the' V
COUI
,J teach.
0
I thougbt .'ince there i n competition, u to peak. it uld be g d
1 create R. R numbers for thl: c ur . 'a w call uch even more peopl on ampw. My la\\cia:: e'l have b ncfit d greatly from having graduate per pective. and 1 think having more in there will he a b n tit to both the law and rhe E tudent
Thank !
Bl:\~E
HlIO'O
BUR J1\GTO,
RI:.
OURLI:. ' PROf b... SOR J:-J IRO. 11:: T L
L
\Iy
EmVARD J. WOr-L\C, JR. PROf-I:: " I R I
E
I:!W'r LA \\
J)1. APPOI M
L L LAW CE::VTFR
L U H OL OF THE COAST AND E '·fRO M
~
J
B10I IT'ITTER
1 EAST ' MPUS DRIV~~, OH-In: 43
Loul I I\A T. Tl: 1\ I.R f fY
B TO. r
0 (iE, LA 0,03
(225) -7~-4 64
From: Michael D KaUer
Sent: Thursday, December 0 , 20143:38 PM
To: Blake Hudson
Cc: Christopher F DfElia
Subject: ENVS/RNR course proposals
Hello Blake,
Could you send me a memo indicating tha you wish to cross-list your courses with RNR to increase opportunities for students? One memo will suffice, if it lists the three courses. This is the final item that I need for the proposals.l have cc'd Dean D'Elia to indicate that I will send the ENVSfRNR cross-listing

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course proposals forward to the College C&C committee once I have the memo. Wouldn't hurt to have an e­ mail from him too.
Mike Kaller, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and
Curriculum Coordinator,
School of Renewable Natural Res ur e
Associate Rector,
Agriculture Residence College
From: Blake Hudson
Sent: Tue 10/28/2014 12:27 PM
To: Michael D KaUer
Subject: Syllabi
11ik . it 'uSl tl1lck me lhat [may r may nut Inn ent yt u the Ihrec cou _·lJabi that I hope we can cr ate R R numb r. for. In c I didn·t. here they arc. l:.mironmental La,,\and Polil:y
[ntt;mati nal En"il' nm ntal Law and Polic) aluml Re~ource Lm\i and Polil.: (a paper cia. s 'cminar - ' J have 31
0 attached th pap r
',l,Titing in fo.)
BL K
Huo
0'\
B JRLl 'G 0 . OtJRl
~'
PROH:')' R I . EN\: IIW '\-11' rAt L
EmVARD J. WO\lI '. JR. PRmL OR I'J
E
I::.RVr L. V,:
JOl 'I l\PPOl TME.'>J I, ASSO('\ATF PROI'ESSOR
LS U LA W 'Et\TlR
LSUSCHrOLOFTHECO sr .. DE
VIROM1f:T v-.
] EASl CAMPU' DRIVI-, )nlC E 436
LOUIS/A, A ATE
U,
Iv I::.RSITY
B TO, ROUGE, LA 70 03
(125) 57 -4064

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
From: Lawrence 1 Rouse <lrouse@lsu.edu>
To: Michael D KaUer <mkallel @lsu.edu>
Cc: Blake Hudson <blake. udson@Iaw lsu.edu>; monster?? <mon ter77@aol.com>;
<annbrust@lsu.edu>
Subje ct:
Re: ENVS / RNR cross-listing -- lustification
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 20156:22 pm
I suggest that we use Mike's note as the justification for the cross listing.
Sent from my iPhone
I
~~
Michael 0 Kaller <mkalle1@lsu.edu>
To: Lawrence J Rouse <lrouse@lsu.edu>, Blake Hudson <blake.hudson@law.lsu.edu>
Cc: monster?? <monster?7@aol.com>; Kevin L Armbrust <armbrust@lsu.edu>
Oat e: Wed, Mar 4.20154:26 pm
Hello Blake, Larry, Vince, and Kevin,
Th importance of the RNR rubric to the graduate students is really about profes ional certification after graduation. Students avoid cla ses that will not apply toward the certifications. Many students, specifically those oriented toward forestry and wildlife careers and less those oriented toward fisheries and wetland careers are interested. in being recognized by their professional societie as certified forester or certified wildlife scientist. For foresters, certification is important for employment with tate agencies or fonning a consulting forestry firm. For wildlife students, some states require certification and other states financially reward certified employees. Certification for all societies requires a review of transcripts and the recently graduated students have the b rden to establish that the courses fit the

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for form C . Request for Changing a Course categories. Usually, the societies recognize course descriptions (e.g., Wildlife Technique IS the description used by ost univ rsities) or recognized the rubrics (e.g., WILD or WMAN or
WFMGT are commonly used rubrics across universities). When rubrics or descriptions are not recognized, the students have additional burdens.
I was not on the faculty when the ASH, FOR, and WILD rubrics were combined into RNR.
However, I did inherit the some of the paperwork. The professional societies were informed by letter about the change. There was extensive correspondence from what 1 understand, and it appeared to be difficult to convince the societies that the new RNR x:x:xx was the same as the former WILD XXXX or FISH XXXX. Moreover, our recent wildlife hires insist that The
Wildlife Society, in particular, is ecoming more skeptical of general rubrics, like BIOL or
RNR or ENVS, where the course may not be taught by wildlife dentists (presumably, a
WILD rubric somehow guarantees this ould happen?). Therefore, the concern lies in convincing the professional societies that an ENVS rubric may be plugged into their course matrix for certification. Our new hires, both wildlife scientists will not be advising their students into any rubric that may cause problems for certification. They have been very convincing, and other fac ty seem to be going along. Therefore, we are looking at 5-6 faculty, who would account for 20-30 graduate student (our largest group), who would not participate. 1 would bet that the forestry faculty would participate, but they account for far fewer graduate students. Among the fish and wetland faculty, the rubric is a non-issue, but again we (I am a fish and invertebrate ecologist) account for fewer tudents (under 30).
Mike KaUer, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and
Curriculum Coordinator,
School of Renewable Natural Re ources
Associate Rector,
Agriculture Residence College

Rev. 1/2015
Req t for
CHA GING an Elt I1lng Cou
Department
ClIur:>I!
IbAlri:
A
Ntsnlll!"
Environmental SCiences
ENVS 7048
RSf DESCRIPTIO
Natural Resources Law and Policy
Semester Houni of Credit 3
If combinahOn COU'SI! typ t hrs. for or craflt
Repeat Credit Max. repe..mble}:
'if
Lecture: 3
Gl'i!duate Creer?
Yes~
Credit WIll not
CDUrsea. : be given for thIs
No_
College
Date
SC&.E (School of the Coast a
Environment)
2/25/2015
Oln/P:cet
7 Natural resU n pcIJcy deb.m!s
Uw and PoIlc:y (3) Leg to,ng naturi1l1S:llr'CeS e
Mechanisms by.,. law NO polIcy radii Ie resot.llU management l'l t
US., no wortdwide. Assessml!nt ' sde/lC! 'suct1lT<MllQement.
JUSTlFtCATlON/EXPLANAnON: Use sep ral sheet
No • IF COURSE IS OR WILL BE CROSS-USTED. SEP RATE FORMS MUST 9E S e

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
ENVS / RNR 7048 Natural Resources Law and Policy
JUSTIFICATION:
Adding this course to the RNR rubric will make it more accessible and desirable to RNR graduate students.
Dr. Michael KaUer clarifies this issue' his recent email (attached to this application and quot d here):
''The importance of the RNR rubric to the graduate students" really about professional certification after graduation. Students avoid classes that wifJ not apply toward the certifications. Many students specifically those oriented toward forestry and wildlife careers and less those oriented toward fisheries and wetland careers are interested in being recognized by their professional so ieties as a certified forester or certified wildlife scientist.
For foresters, certification is important for employment with state agencies or forming a consulting forestry firm. For wildlife students, some states require certification and other states financially reward certified employees. Certification for all societies requires a review of transcripts, and the recently graduated tudents have the burden to establish that the courses fit the categories. Usually, the societies recognize course descriptions (e.g., Wildlife Techniques is the description used by most universities) or recognized the rubrics
(e.g., WILD or WMAN or WFMGT are commonly used rubrics across universities). When rubrics or descriptions are not recognized, the students have additional burdens.
I was not on the faculty when the FISH, FOR, and WILD rubrics were combined into RNR. However, I did inherit the some of the paperwork. The pr fessional societies were informed by letter about the change. There was extensive correspondence from what I understand, and it appeared to be difficult to convince the societies that the new RNR XXXX was the same as the former WILD XXXX or FISH XXXX. Moreover our recent wildlife hires insist that The Wildlife Society, in particular, is becoming more skeptical of general rubrics, like BIOL or RNR or
ENVS, where the courses may not be taught by wildlife scientists (presumably, a WILD rubric somehow guarantees this would happen?). Therefore, the concern lies in convincing the professional societies tha an
ENVS rubric may be plugged into their curse matrix for certification. Our new hires both wildlife cientists, will not be advising their students into an rubric that may cause problems for certification. They have been very convincing, and other faculty seem to be going along. Therefore, we are looking at 5-6 faculty, who would account for 20-30 graduate students (our largest group), who would Dot participate. I would bet that the fore try faculty would participate, but they account for far fewer graduate students. Among the fish and wetland faculty, the rubric is a non-issue, but again we (I am a fish a d invertebrate ecologist) account for fewer students (under 30). "
Additional notes:
The course has room for more students an the addition of RNR graduate students will only strength n the overall enrollment. The course is also offered as a LAW ourse, and the instructor believes the classroom environment is enhanced greatly by teaching LAW, ENVS, and RNR students in the arne clas room.
CURRICULUM:
At present, this course is not inc uded as a required course in any curriculum, and is an optional course for graduate students.

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
Correspondence:
From: Christopher F 'Elia
Sent: Thursday December 04,20143:43 PM
To: Michael D Kaller; Blak H d on
Subject: RE: ENVS/RNR course proposals ike, OK. with me. Chris.
From: Blake Hudson
Sent: Thu 12/4/20148:48 PM
To: Michael D KaUer; Christopher F D'Elia
Subject: RE: ENVS/RNR course proposals
Chri . the reaSOD I went forward .... ir11 rhi
IS because I ha e only had one R tudent in 3 years moll in th V com e.1 teach. So 1 thought inc there j • n ) competition, a to peak. it would be g otl t cr te R R number' for the cours
0 we can r ach ven more people an campus. ~ law las 'e ha 'e ben fit d gr tly from ha\ ing grnduate both tb Jaw od the Etudent~, p r pect!ves and I think hav ing more in there wiII be a benetit t
Thank. !
BL. ~ HUI> 0 .
BURLl'r\GTO RI:SOUR<. ES PROI-l .. R L
JDWARDJ.WOMAC',JR.PROFE. ORI
£1\
VIRO H
~
AI. L \ \
E cf{G'r"L \\
JOI. T ApPOf MI:.;-.jT
L U LA CE TER
L US HOOL JTHE COt T 0\. Db VIRO ME~T
!!!Q I ~ I
T\ ITI'E~
J fA 'T C MP\IS DRIvE. On-ICE 4
Lo
ISlA
ST.
T .
U tv
RSrry
BA
1'(
R eGE. LA 70XO
(22:) 57 -4064
From: Michael D KaUer
Sent: Thursday, December 04,20143:38 PM
To: Blake Hudson
Cc: Christopher F D'Elia
Subject: ENVS/RNR course prop sa
Hello Blake,
Could you send me a memo indicating that you wis to cross-list your courses with RNR to increase opportunities for students? One memo will suffice, if it lists the three courses. This is the final item that I need for the proposals. I have cc'd Dean D'Elia to indicate that I will send the ENVSIRNR cross-listing

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course proposals forward to the College C&C committee once [have th memo. Wouldn't hurt to have an e­ mail from him too.
Mike Kaller, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and
Curriculum Coordinator,
School of Renewable Natural Resources
Associate Rector,
Agriculture Residence College
From: Blake Hudson
Sent: Tue 10/28/2014 12:27 PM
To: Michael D Kaller
Subject: Syllabi
Mik . it just snl.lck me thai 1 Illay r may not hav s nt
J ou the br e cou e . lIabi that I hope w can cr at R R number for. [11 ca I didn' r, her thl::y are.
Environmental Law and P It~y
Intemational Em irol1m ot31 L
\V and Polie) amra! R urce La.. and Policy (a paper cia. seminar -:0 I have al attached the pa r writing info.)
BAKEHoo
B
RLl'\GTU S lRCESPROFf. RI:-.JE VIRO '\11:: r'\I.LAW
'DW RDJ. WO\tIA ,JR. PRmE. OR IN
JOIN
E
ERG'y LAW
PPO! ML·J. " 'DClA n:
PRO!' .:SSOR
L-'U
LAW
C
'l'TER
L 'U ('II UL 01- THI
COt\~T
AND NVIRONML T
BID I _J.lN I TWITTER
L EAST CAMPUS DRIVE, OFFICE 436
LOVISI A STAT\:; U IVl::RSITY
BA.
TO ROUGE,
LA 70 03
(22~) 57 '-4064

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course
From: Lawrence J Rouse <lrouse@lsu.edu>
Michael D KaUer <mkallel@l u.edu>
Cc: Blake Hudson <blake.hudson@law.lsu.edu>; monster77 <monster77 @aol.com>;
<armbrust@lsu.edu>
Subje ct:
Re: ENVS / RNR cross-listing -- Justification
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 20156:22 pm
I suggest that we use Mike's note as the justifi ation for the cross listing.
Sent from my iPhone
~o
Michael 0 Kaller <mkalle1@lsu.edu>
To: Lawrence J Rouse <Irouse@lsu.edu>; Blake Hudson <blake.hudson@law.lsu.edu>
Cc: monster?? <monster?7@aol.com>; Kevin L Armbrust <armbrust@lsu.edu>
Oat e: Wed, Mar4, 20154:26 pm
Hello Blake, Larry, Vince, and Kevin,
The importance of the RNR rubric to the graduate students is really about professional certification after graduation. Students avoid classes that will not apply toward the certifications. Many students, specifically those oriented toward forestry and wildlife careers and less those oriented toward fisheries and wetland careers, are interested in being recognized by their professional societies as a certified forester or certified wildlife scientist. For foresters certification is important for employment with state agencies or forming a consulting forestry firm. For wildlife students, some states require certification and other states financially reward certified employees. Certification for all societies requires a review of transcripts, and the recently graduated students have the burden to establish that the course fit the

Rev. 9/2014
Instructions for Form C . Request for Changing a Course categories. Usually, the societies recognize course descriptions (e.g., Wildlife Techniqu s i the description used by most universitie ) or recognized the rubrics (e.g., WILD or WMAN or
WFMGT are commonly used rubrics ac oss universities). When rubrics or descriptions are not recognized, the students have additional burden.
I was not on the faculty when the FISH, FOR, and WILD rubrics were combined into RNR.
However, I did inherit the some of the paperwork. The profes ional societies were informed by letter about the change. There was extensive correspondence from what I understand, and it appeared to be difficult to convince the ocieties that the new RNR XXXX was the same as the former WILD XXXX r FISH XXXX. Moreover, our recent wildlife hires insist that The
Wildlife Society, in particular, is becoming more skeptical of general rubrics, like BIOL or
RNR or ENVS, where the courses may not be taught by wildlife scientist (presumably, a
WILD rubric somehow guarantees th' would happen?). Therefore, the concern lie in convincing the professional societies that an ENVS rubric may be plugged into their course matrix for certification. Our new hires, both wildlife scientists, will not be advising their students into any rubric that may ause problems for certification. They have been v ry convincing, and other fac lty seem to be going along. erefore, we are looking at 5-6 faculty, who would account for 20-30 gra uate student
(OUI largest group), who would not participate. I would bet that the forestry faculty would participate, but they account for far fewer graduate students. Among the fish and wetland faculty, the rubric is a non-issue, but again we (I am a fish and invertebrate ecologist) account for fewer student (under 30).
Mike KaUer, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and
Curriculum Coordinator,
School of Renewable Natural Resources
Associate Rector,
Agric lture Residence College

Anna M Castrillo
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
S ject:
Attachments:
Vincent L Wilson
Tuesday, March 24, 2015 6:30 PM
Anna M Castrillo
Lawrence J Rouse
3 Form C course applications for the FS C&C Co mittee review
Application Cross-List E VS-RNR 7043 EnvLawReg.pdf; Application Cross-List ENV$­
R R 7046 IntEnvLaw.pdf; Application Cross-list ENVS-RNR 7048 NatResLawPol.pdf
An a,
Attached are three change of course (Form C) applications that should be coupled with matching course applications from RNR that arrived in the FS C&C Committee a few months ago. These applications are intended to set up the cross-listing between ENVS 7043 and RNR 7043, ENVS 7046 and RNR 7046, ENVS 7048 and RN R 7048.
Please let me know if I need to do anything else.
Thanks,
Vince
1

Rev. 1/2DlS
Request for
an Existing Course
/
FORMC
J - " " "
,
-
_-.
-
Errective \
~ \1
,
.tJ\ln
Department
COlJrse Rubric &
Number
Electrical and Computer Engr
EE 4240
College Engineering
Date 1/29/2015
·RESENT COURSE DESCRIPTION itle
I
Unear Orcuit Design emester Hours of Credit
13
~
: combination course
!pe, # hrs. of credit lr
Lecture: Z
.epe.at Credit Max. (if
~peatable):
I iraduate Credit?
I
Yes ~ redit will no be given for this ourse and:
No_ _
Lab/Sem/Rec: 1 ontad Hours Per Week: (Indicate hours In appropriate CDur:;e type.) "
2cture
~
I
Lab -.2
I
Seminar otal Weekly Contad Hours:
I
4
Recitation
I
Intern
Res/Ind
I
Gin/Prad trading System: Letter Grade ~ Pass/Fail _ _ ourse Description; ndydc CNR Dumber, lllle etc. rnctIy as It aoocars 10 lh!: Gmt:ri:I Cit;Wql rereq,: EE 3220 and EE 3221. Credit or regIstration in ff..)1U, 2 hrs. lecture; hrs. lab. ABt:/ category: 2 hrs. design; 1 hr. englneedng science. Fabrication nd use ofdiscrete and monolithic integrated drcuits,. use of building blocks
)r design of analog systems.
PROPOSED COURSE DESCRIPTION
Title
I
Linear Orcult Design
Short Title
LIII~~~ ICIII~(I~
Semester Hours
3 of Credit rrt l~f~N
If combination course type, # hrs. of credit for
Repeat Credit Max.
(if repeatable):
Lecture:
.1
Graduate Credit?
Yes X No_
I
Lab/Sem/Rec:..1
Credit will not be given for this course and:
Contact Hours Per Week: (1ndlcate houlS In appropriate toUr&! I.Vpe.) 4
Le.ctu~
I
~b
I
Seminar
I
Recitation
I
Intern
I
Res/rnd
IOfn/pract
Total Weekly Contact Hours:
Grading System:
~
Letter Grade .-X
I
Pass/Fall _ _
CQurse DesoiDtion:
Ondydc QlU!'$C number gdc. c!l:.
C@Cl1y as
It 8QQCjlf5
In lhl: C.maiI QIatM)
Prereq.: EE 3220 and EE 3221. 2 h~ lecture; Z hrs. lab. ABET category:
2 hrs. design; 1 hr. engineering science FabnCiJtion and use of discrete and monolithiC mtegrated areuits; use of building blocks for design of analog systems.
HESE Q ESnONS M ST BE ANSWERED COMPLETELY AND ACCURATELY OR PROPOSAL WILL BE RETURNED. las this change been discussed with and approved by all departments/colleges affected? Yes _ _ No_ _ ~
; this course ',ncluded in any curricula, concentrations. or minors? Yes_ _ ~ If yes, please list on a separate sheet
L
If yes, list courses; use separate sheet.
; this course on the General Education list? Yes_ _ No ~
USTIFICATION/EXPLANATION: Use separate sheet. lote: IF COURSE IS OR WilL BE CROSS-LISTED. SEPARATE FORMS MUST BE SUBMITTED BY EACH DEPARTMENT
,PPROVALS epartment FaQJlty Approval Date 1-2.")-1<) l. (
,3-(: IJ'"'" artmen! Choir Signature (dole)
G;
~
;roduote Dean Signalure
--j ~-=-1~-')
(dalel
~-ll
:ollege Conlae E-mail

Pre-requisites Changes (Approved by ECE Faculty)
EE4240: Linear Circuit Design
Current Pre-requisites: EE3220 and EE3221, Credit or Registration in EE3232
New Pre-requisites: EE3220 and EE3221
Explanation: Updated course content of EE4240 which now uses the 5 th Edition of text "Analog and Design of Analog Integrated Circuits," by Gray, Hurst, Lewis and Meyer, Wiley requires a strong background in Analog Electronics at the level of EE3220 using both bipolar and MOS transistor based circuits - analysis and design. EE2231 (Electronics I Lab) is good enough which gives understanding of basic electronics circuit design concepts and therefore E£3221 is no more needed. Since EE4240 is based on device models and is already covered, credit or registration in EE3232 is also not needed.
Addendum: This course is bipolar junction transistor and MOS field effect transistor ­ equivalent circuit model based for the analysis and design of analog integrated circuits. The equivalent circuit models are to be taught in the beginning before using these models for bipolar and MOSFET-based analog circuit design using analytical circuit analysis and simulation from SPICE program. The designed experiments on analog circuit designs based on both analytical and simulation methods are then tested in the laboratory. Since EE3232 Solid State
Devices as the name reflects, in actual course offering, teaches fundamentals of semiconductor devices such as bipolar junction diodes, bipolar junction transistors and MOSFETs and other devices after teaching physics of semiconductors. Thus, students learn introduction to bipolar junction transistors and MOSFETs close to the end of the semester. More so equivalent circuit models of bipolar junction transistors and MOSFETs are not covered. Using EE3232 as a co­ requisite does not benefit EE4240 which requires understanding of device models and its equivalent circuit in very beginning of EE4240 offering. Thus, EE3232 is not needed.
EE4242: VLSI Design
Current Pre-requisites: EE2740 and E8220
New Pre-requisites: EE2740, EE2230 and EE2231
Explanation: Updated course content of EE4242 which now uses the 2 nd
Edition of "Digital
Integrated Circuits -A Design P rspective,
/I by Rabaey, Chandrakasan and Nikolic, Prentice Hall requires a strong background in Digitallogk Design at the level of EE2740 and basic electronics at the level of EE2230 and EE2231. Since EE4242 is based on MOS digital electronics it does not require EE3220. Also EE4242 is organized in such a way that that both electrical and computer engineering students can take this course as is the current pattern. This course is of highly interdisciplinary nature.

Addendum: The digital logic design-based EE4242 VLSt Design is solely based on digital CMOS logic design and involves design automation tools which has allowed students from both computer engineering/science and electrical engineering can be educated and trained according to industry standard. With the advancement in the field of VLSI sys em (chip) design, background in electronics is limited to a level of basic electronics such as covered in EE2230
(Electronics I) and EE2231 (Electronics 1 Lab). Since there is no analog electronics component to digital VLSI Design (EE4242), a background in EE3230 (Electronics II), which is an analog electronics-based course covering devices from ipolar junction devices to MOS transistors, is not required.

Division of Electrical & Computer Engineering Fall 2015
EE -tNO I.inl'llr ( i
Tull
I
L:lgn
(3
CI ·.Iil): 2 HoUl's of lecture- and 2 hours of laboratory per week as defined in New Cr dit lour Definiti n dated Augu. t 29. 2013 from Chair Faculty
Senate Cours and Curriculum Committee
Credit Hour Expectation: lL i peeted thaL the stud nts have read the chapLer pri r to clas for the background neee ary to proper! learn the conL nt and appl. the the concep addre' ed.
As a general policy. for each hour ofthc class, the stud nr should plan to spend at least two hours on preparing for the next elas and completing lab raL ry and homework as i 'nments.
Instructor: Dr. A. Srivastava, Professor (eesriv@lsu.cdu)
Objective: The objective of the course is to analyze and design various building blocks for analog applications, design operational amplifiers in CMOS and bipolar technologies. I h foundalipn ("\1 Lhl,. 'pur..: h~~III'
\\ itll til j ,I ) Tl , I" a r
.111 all
II:. "I lIi:t 1 If UI n1\)ddS urnr<ltihk \ ilh I
II "Pill
II
"ula
I .
31 tg ir III l:<.;i£!Tl h.1.: i n th
> .1,; eqU1\"ak-n ircult mo 11.:1" Ill' lIUlI I. t< r :.Ir t· t I· n I d nI.:l nlcd
III til la lr,lt r.
Prerequisites: I <2':fl • 'do
' n l
H , __ I
' U l I
Your name will be removed if you do not meet the course requirement and have a letter grade
"0" in any of the required courses.
Textbook: Paul R. Gray, Paul 1. Hurst, Stephen H. Lewis and Robert G. Meyer, Analysis and
Design ofAnalog lntegraled Circuits, 5 1h Edition. John-Wile, 2009.
Lab Manual: A. Srivastava, Linear Circuit Design - A Laboratory ManuaJ, Rev. 6/09.
Note: Any upgrades will be provided during lab hours.
Course Syllabus:
Chapter 2: Review of Bipolar, OS Integrated-Circuit Technology
Chapter I: Review of Models for Integrated-Circuit Active Device
Chapter 3: Differential Pairs (Section 3.5)
Chapter 4: Current Mirrors an Active Loads
Chapter 5: Output Stages (Section 5.4)
Chapter 6: Operational Amplifiers with Single-Ended Outputs
Chapter 7: Frequency esponse of Integrated Circuits
Chapter 8: Feedback Circuits excluding Voltage Regulators (sug ested reading)
Chapter 9: Introduction to Fre uency R spon e and Sta ility of Feedback Amplifiers
Chapter 10: Nonlinear Analog Circuit (Section IOJ - Phase-Locked Loops)
Homework and Laboratory: Regular homework as ignments will be given. Every student will be required to work in laboratory to conduct laboratory experiments following the Laboratory
Manual. Homework and laboratory experiment will require an extensive use of PSPICE.
Lecture Hours: M W; Laboratory Hours: T TH

Grading:
Test I (Midterm Exam): 20%
Test I1 20%
Final Exam
HW
25%
10%
Lab 25%
11
12
13
14
15
8
9
10
5
6
7
Total 100%
Note: No make-up test/exam will be given except for legitimate medical reasons.
Grades: A (90-100), B: 75-89, C: 60-74, D: 50-59, F: <59.
Office Hours: To be announced
(EE249; Email: as"ok(a'!gce.lsu.edu)
Note: You are responsible for any change and updates that are given during lecture hOUTS.
EE4240 Laboratory: All lab ratory reports mu t be word-processed and include the following:
I) Object, 2) Circuit diagram including node number if simulated using PSPI E, 3)
Observations, 4) Analysis and Discussion and 5) Conclusion.
Laboratory reports will be due in the folJowing week of the laboratory for submi sion to the
TA1Instructor concerned for grading.
Lab Schedule
Sr. No.
1,2
3
Lab Numbers (From the Lab Manual)
Laboratory Instrumentation (instructions in the class) and
Perfonnance Test of an Amplifier
The Cascode Amplifier
4 Class B Amplifiers
Current Source
The Differential Amplifier
Amplifie D sign and Characterization
A Discrete Parts Operational Amplifier: Part I and Part Ll
AmplifieT Circuits
Wavefonn Generation
Digital-to-Analog Conversion (DAC)
Voltage-Controlled 0 illator
Analog Switches
Phase-Locked Loop
Make-up Lab
2

Social media and other policies
I. DO NOT USE CELL POE OR OTHER MEOlA TO RECEIVE OR CALL PHONES OR E-
MAlLS DU G THE ACTTVE CL SSfLAB TIME.
2. Students are responsibl for familiarizing the elves with policie and procedures uch as PS-22
(Student Absence from Cl s) and code of stud nt c nduct (http:tI aa.1 u.edufco e- udent­ conduct), especially misconduct" Sec 'on 8.
3. Follow safety i tructions for wor in in the laboratory. Always use common sense approach in regards to safety considerations
3