NAU-YUMA BRANCH CAMPUS
YUMA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
MINUTES
February 19, 2014
2:15 PM – 3:30 PM
AC 286
Members Present (voting): Charlie Balch, Bill Pederson, Marcie Delmotte, Glenn
Hookstra, Rosie Cordova
Members Present (non-voting): Lisa Wischmeier, Jenny Scott, Lisa Williams, Rosa
Corona, Nicole Morrow, Patrick Deegan
Guests Permanent (non-voting): Craig VanLengen, Jeannie Copley, Alison Brown,
Constance Brown, Cori Gordon, Paige Miller-Leister, Eleanor McTyre
Guests: Jack Ferrell, Amalia Garzon, Bruce Fox, Melinda Treml
WELCOME AND CALL TO ORDER
Charlie Balch called the meeting to order at 2:15 PM and welcomed all members of the
committee.
INTRODUCTIONS (MEMBERS, LIAISONS AND GUESTS)
All committee members and guests introduced themselves.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the 01/22/14 YCC meeting were approved as submitted.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
None
LIAISON REPORTS


Earl Smith (AWC Liaison from AWC Curriculum Committee) – Absent
Bill Pederson (NAU Liaison to AWC Curriculum Committee) – Bill has attended the
AWC Curriculum Committee meetings. He has nothing to report impacting NAU.
OLD BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS



Information Items:
o Non-EC Bachelor Plans: Charlie requested that all Non-EC Bachelor Plans be
considered en masse. Patrick Deegan told Lisa Wischmeier that College of
education wants to remove the following sentence from paragraph 8a of the
New Plan forms BIS LP and BIS Early Childhood: “Note: If you want to
major in Interdisciplinary Studies-Early Childhood, you must apply and be
accepted to the College of Education’s teacher education program in addition
to being admitted to the university.” There was no further discussion.
 Plan Delete
 Criminal Justice BAIS Plan Delete
 Criminal Justice BSIS Plan Delete
 Early Childhood BAIS Plan Delete
 Early Childhood BSIS Plan Delete
 Env Sci BAIS Plan Delete
 Env Sci BSIS Plan Delete
 Humanities BAIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Humanities BSIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 LP BAIS Plan Delete
 LP BSIS Plan Delete
 Speech Language Sci BAIS Plan Delete
 Speech Language Sci BSIS Plan Delete
 New Plan Forms
 BIS Criminal Justice New Plan
 BIS Early Childhood New Plan
 BIS Humanities 90-30 New Plan
 BIS LP New Plan
 BIS SST New Plan
o PL: Charlie requested that all PL items be considered en masse. There was no
discussion.
 PLD 300 Course Change
 New Courses
 SCIN 182-PL New Course
 SCIN 281-PL New Course
 SCIN 301-PL New Course
 SCIN 302-PL New Course
 SCIN 393-PL New Course
 New Plans
 BS Computer Information Technology New Plan
 BS Liberal Arts New Plan
 BS Small Business Administration New Plan
Fast-Track Items
Action Items
o BBA: Charlie requested that the BBA items be considered en masse. There
was no discussion. The BBA items were endorsed as submitted.
 New Courses
 BBA 201 New Course
 BBA 205 New Course
 BBA 255 New Course
 BBA 256 New Course
 BBA 284 New Course
 BBA 285 New Course
 BBA 301 New Course
 New Plan BUS Minor
 New Plan SPA BUS Minor
 Plan Change BBA All Emphases
o PADM: Charlie requested that the PADM items be considered en masse.
There was no discussion. The BBA items were endorsed as submitted.
 Course Change
 PADM 356 Course Change
 PADM 408C Course Change
 PADM 421C Course Change
o Bachelor Plans: Charlie requested that the Bachelor Plan items be considered
en masse. He mentioned that is often easier to delete the old plans and submit
new plans. There was no discussion. The BBA items were endorsed as
submitted.
 Plan Delete
 Admin BAIS Plan Delete
 Admin BSIS Plan Delete
 EMGT BAIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 EMGT BSIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Intelligence Studies BAIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Intelligence Studies BSIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Justice Studies BA Plan Delete
 Justice Studies BS Plan Delete
 Law Enforcement Mgt BAIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Law Enforcement Mgt BSIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Public Administration BA Plan Delete
 Public Administration BAIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Public Administration BS Plan Delete
 Public Administration BSIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Tech Mgt BAIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Tech Mgt BAIS Plan Delete
 Tech Mgt BSIS 90-30 Plan Delete
 Tech Mgt BSIS Plan Delete
 New Plans
 Bachelor of Justice Studies New Plan
 Bachelor of Public Administration New Plan
 BIS Administration New Plan
 BIS EMGT 90-30 New Plan
 BIS Environmental Science New Plan
 BIS Intelligence Studies 90-30 New Plan


 BIS Law Enforcement Mgt 90-30 New Plan
 BIS Public Administration 90-30 New Plan
 BIS Tech Mgt 90-30 New Plan
Fast-Track Items: None
Action Items:
GOOD OF THE ORDER
None
ADDITIONAL ITEMS
Jack Ferrell mentioned that he will submit changes to the Psychology and Sociology
plans at the March YCC meeting and asked that these changes be included in the Fall
2014 catalog. Charlie reviewed the proposed changes to the course options for students
and asked if these changes could be considered Fast Track. Jenny Scott said that these
changes do not fit the criteria for Fast Track. Lisa Williams said that we can make these
changes happen for the Fall 2014 catalog if they are approved on the March 2014 YCC
Agenda.
REVIEW OF ASSIGNMENTS
None
EXPECTATIONS FOR DEGREE PROGRAMS CURRICULUM AND REDESIGNED CAMPUS PROCESSES
This item was presented to a joint meeting of YCC and ECCC by Bruce Fox and Melinda
Treml. Bruce presented the overview. In April 2013, The University Assessment
Committee (UAC) met with the Council of Teaching and Learning (part of the Faculty
Senate) to discuss the disconnect between assessment and curricular efforts. The Faculty
Senate charged the group to develop a proposal to create a closer link between curriculum
and assessment. Laurie Dickson took the lead and worked with YCC, UAC and UGC to
create a draft proposal to the Faculty Senate for on-campus purposes. The Faculty Senate
asked for feedback from the Chair Council, the Provost’s Council, UGC, Liberal Arts and
UAC. The Faculty Senate asked these councils to go back to their associated collegelevel curricular committees for feedback and discussion. It is important to include
Extended Campuses (EC) in these discussions so that NAU has consistency throughout
the university so Bruce and Melinda are asking for feedback from YCC and ECCC at this
meeting. Bruce realizes that there are unique YCC/ECCC processes. This proposed
change to curricular process needs to be approved by the Faculty Senate who will then
develop an implementation team including representatives from all curricular groups
including ECCC. Patrick asked about the timing for the Faculty Senate review. Bruce
said the goal is to call for a vote at the March or April Faculty Senate meeting. Bruce
said the basic idea has two components: 1) Approval Process and 2) Components (design
elements) of Curriculum. The design elements will include university learning outcomes
and were borrowed from the NAU Yuma plans. Each degree program should have
unique student learning outcomes and the program design and structure should help the
students achieve those learning outcomes. The goal is to make curriculum design process
more closely related to the program review process. Part of the program review report
includes how well students met the learning objectives and then incorporate that
information back in to curricular changes. The goal is to bring all university programs up
to the same level. Currently not all programs on the Mountain Campus are at the same
level. This proposal is intended to support faculty and not be overly burdensome in the
implementation phase. The proposal will integrate curriculum planning and assessment
efforts across the campus. The committee chose to focus the reviewing efforts at the
college level because the college and faculty know what is going on in the classroom.
This process involves the active engagement of deans in combined curricular committees
as well as academic leaders. The University Curriculum & Assessment Committee
(UCAC) will provide the framework and ensure consistency. The role of the Diversity
Council and Global Learning Initiative will be addressed at some time in the future. Bill
asked if UCAC is separate from UCC and ECCC. Bruce confirmed that UCAC is a
separate entity created to coordinate curricular and assessment processes to ensure
consistency. The Advisory Council for Curriculum and Assessment (ACCA) may go
away or become part of UCAC. Bill mentioned that the BASW program just developed
curriculum last summer based on CSWE accreditation standards and asked how this new
proposal would have helped with that process. BASW created a curriculum map to
provide an opportunity to show intentional curriculum design to illustrate how is
addresses student learning goals. Bill asked if UCAC will help curricular committees
understand when there are changes that do not fit into the existing process. Bruce
responded that this is accurate and that these concerns will be addressed in the
implementation process by providing tools and workshops to assist faculty. Jack said that
curriculum and assessment are both important and asked about the risks of combining the
two as the lines may become blurred and one or the other may get neglected rather than
prioritized. Bruce said the opposite will happened since they are two pieces of the same
concept. The proposal will help identify any overlaps or omissions. The goal is to have
good curriculum that helps students and contains assessment to show how those
outcomes are achieved. Sue Pieper is very engaged on the Yuma Campus through the
Higher Learning Commission (HLC). She wants to bring the other colleges across the
Mountain campus up to the level of the Yuma campus. Marcie Delmotte asked if
curriculum mapping will be added to the assessment plan report. Melinda confirmed this.
Marcie said that the PAJS department is already doing this. Melinda said that what is
coming out of YCC & ECCC shows this proposal is already happening. Marcie asked
how this proposal will impact YCC & ECCC and asked about the role of YCC. Bruce
explained that ECCC operates as a college and needs to determine how this proposal will
work for their college. Alison Brown said her understanding is that YCC, YACC and
PLCC are parallel to colleges under ECCC which is parallel to the university structure.
Melinda said that Franke College, College of Forestry & Nursing College all have
assessment and curriculum committees with liaison between them. What is consistent is
the criteria. UCAC will provide training and allow more people to become more
educated about the process. Marcie asked if assessment would be determined at the
college level rather than by ECCC. Bruce replied that the individual group structures are
still to be determined. The focus is on the same design standards using the same criteria
throughout NAU. Marcie asked if the assessment form will be redesigned again.
Melinda said she was not sure and that will be determined during the implementation
phase in 2015/2016. Marcie asked if we will have a say in the implementation phase.
Melinda said that UCAC will be looking for feedback and will be conducting interviews
throughout the process. Charlie mentioned that he is a member of ACCA and that the
first step should be to review forms to make sure they are assessment-friendly. After this
proposal is passed by the Faculty Senate, it is designed to provide ACCA with
information to help with form redesign over the next two years. Glenn Hookstra asked if
it would be more realistic to view Yuma as a college and view the Yuma departments
(Education, Business, Arts & Sciences and PADM) in the same manner as Franke
College or College of Education. Bruce said that we will need to continue open lines of
communication as we go along. Jeannie asked if NAU is considering a system-wide
repository for syllabus to provide transparency. Melinda said that Liberal Studies is
already taking on this task and is working to define the standard and collect good
examples and processes that achieve that stand for a repository. Bill asked about
curricular forms and student learning outcomes and remarked the proposed program
plans have no way to link course outcomes and standards. Bruce replied that the plan is
to address this through design. Melinda said that there is evidence that this meeting of
curriculum and assessment is becoming natural at YCC and they do not want to force-fit
this proposal. Bruce asked YCC & ECCC to contact him with any future questions.
ADJOURN
After the conclusion of the discussion on Expectations for Degree Programs Curriculum
and Re-Designed Campus Processes, the YCC meeting was adjourned at 3:30 PM.
NEXT MEETING
The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 2:15 PM.