CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
Salem State University
MINUTES
Meeting: 13/14:15
Date: 22 January 2014
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Elizabeth Blood; Elizabeth Coughlan; Elizabeth Duclos-Orsello; Kathleen Hess; Joseph
Kasprzyk; Stephen Matchak; Christopher Mauriello; Rory McFadden; Megan Miller; Zachary
Newell; Anne Noonan; Amy Sprenkle; Jeffrey Theis
GUESTS: Vickie Ross, Ryan Fisher (Biology), Gretchen Sinnett (Art + Design), James
Gubbins (IDS), Kanishkan Sathasivam (Political Science)
I.
Chair’s Report
Jeffrey Theis announced that a quorum had been reached and called the meeting to order
at 3:08 PM
A. Meeting Schedule for Spring 2014:
January 29, 2014
February 5, 2014
February 12, 2014
February 19, 2014
February 26, 2014
March 5, 2014
March 19, 2014
March 26, 2014
April 2, 2014
April 9, 2014
April 16, 2014
April 23, 2014
April 30, 2014
May 7, 2014
May 14, 2014
May 21, 2014
Jeffrey announced that the committee needs to vote on the minutes from the meetings that
were held on 12/11 and 12/18.
Voting on minutes for the meeting held on 12/11/13: 9 in favor, 0 opposing, 3 abstaining.
Voting on the minutes for the meeting held on 12/18/13: 11 in favor, 0 opposing, 1
abstaining
Jeffrey checked on the status of the flowsheets; many are almost ready. He requested that
anyone with Honors-related courses pull the course out of their packet and send the
Honors proposal to him so he can consolidate them and they can be considered together.
Other packets are ready for next week's meeting.
II.
Subcommittee Reports
No reports
III.
Special Business
No special business
IV. Old Business
General Education
A. BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT (10/16/13) (CRS B, Chris M. SR and W3, 11/22/13)
(14:136-14:146 are Existing course, gen ed;)
BIO105-Biological Systems (SR)
BIO115H-Honors Biology-Organisms (SR)
BIO116H-Honors Biology-Cells (SR)
BIO121-Diveristy of Life (SR)
BIO122-World of Cells (SR)
BIO124-Human and Social Biology (SR)
BIO131-Introduction to Organisms (SR)
BIO132-Introduction to Cells (SR)
BIO204-Introduction to Human Genetics-Change in Course (SR)
BIO214-Marine Biology-Change in Course (SR)
BIO402-Genetics (W-III)
14:136
14:137
14:138
14:139
14:140
14:141
14:142
14:143
14:144
14:145
14:146
Megan Miller made a motion to approve the Biology Department packet 14:136-14:146;
Elizabeth Duclos-Orsello seconded.
Ryan Fisher was the representative from the Biology Department.
Discussion: The packet consists of changes to existing courses to make them Gen Ed Scientific
Reasoning (SR) courses. Question: Why was BIO200 and 201 omitted from this packet of proposals;
it is a science sequence used by a lot by transfer students. Answer: It was not considered because
those courses (BIO200 and 201) have a lot of pre- and co-requisites and the department did not think
that was in the spirit of the new Gen Ed curriculum. This may be something for discussion later.
Question: It is good that there are some 3-credit courses proposed as SR courses; is there any more
discussion about proposing other 3-credit courses? Answer: there is some discussion in the works. A
3-credit BIO course will be very popular. Question about 3-credit Gen Ed courses: Criteria about
data collection and analysis (3E and 4); is there any issue about meeting that criterion in a non-lab
course? Answer: Criterion 3E and Criterion 4 have been interpreted by SR subcommittee to be only
relevant for laboratory courses – it is in the original wording for the SR category: "(required in
laboratory courses)." There was discussion about whether you can practice Scientific Reasoning
without collecting data; it was agreed that students do not have to collect data in order to practice
scientific reasoning. The category liaison for SR is Mark Fregeau; he vetted this packet and let the 3credit courses go through without 3E and 4 checked. The language seems to be pretty explicit – 3E
and 4 are not required for non-lab courses. That was the spirit of the PACCC discussion last year.
One of the 3-credit courses does address 3E – and that is OK; 3-credit courses can "opt in" to criteria
3E and 4, but it is required for lab courses to address these criteria.
With much discussion and no changes, the vote to approve the Biology Department packet
14:136-14:146 was unanimous
B. ART + DESIGN DEPARTMENT (10/31/13) (CRS B, Liz D-C, and CEA, 11/22/13)
ART100A-Introduction to World Art-(CEA)
14:179
Elizabeth Duclos-Orsello made a motion to approve the Art + Design Department proposal
14:179; Zachary Newell seconded.
Gretchen R Sinnett was the representative from the Art + Design Department.
Discussion: This is an existing course being put forth as a CEA course. Everyone on CEA and CRS
B subcommittee supported it fully. The course is specifically designed for non-majors – it is a broadbased introduction to art. The big change in the course for CEA certification is the addition of a
hands-on component and a reflection paper. Question: there are many art history courses in
department – will they be proposed as CEA courses at any point. Answer: At some point they will.
The department is talking through which courses should be submitted. One hurdle to submitting
more Art + Design courses for the new Gen Ed curriculum is the lack of space for additional
students.
With little discussion and no changes, the vote to approve the Art + Design Department proposal
14:179 was unanimous
C. INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES DEPARTMENT (10/30/13)
(14:173 & 14:174 are Change in Flowsheet)
BLS-American Studies Concentration-Change in Flowsheet
BLS-Intercultural Communications Concentration-Change in Flowsheet
14:173
14:174
Rory McFadden made a motion to approve the Interdisciplinary Studies Department packet
14:173-14:174; Anne Noonan seconded.
James Gubbins was the representative from the Interdisciplinary Studies Department.
Discussion: Letters from all the affected departments for the changes to the flowsheets are included
in the packet. The changes were necessary because The old flowsheet had many courses specified
"on the left side" and these cannot be specified in the new GenEd. These courses have been moved
to the right side as concentration or support courses. The changes also reflect adjustments that
needed to be made to update the curriculum and make the concentration more aligned with
benchmarks. One change that needs to be made on the new flowsheet: Humanities perspective and
Social Science Perspective should both be changed to say 6-9 credits. Question: Historically the
American Studies flowsheets had courses on the left-hand side. With the new GenEd they have to be
moved to the right-hand side. Why were they moved to the category "support courses" instead of
"concentration courses" – as "support courses" they can be "double-dipped" in the GenEd whereas if
they were "concentration courses" they could not be "double-dipped." Those courses are required for
the concentration but, because of the inherent interdisciplinary nature of the concentration, they are
not in the IDS department. Despite not being in the IDS department those courses could be
considered required concentration courses instead of support courses. Answer: A practical reason to
do it this way – include them as "support courses" – is that there is an issue of transferability. Having
them as "support courses" allows students a bit more flexibility. This concentration is largely
unknown to our students, they discover IDS or American studies later, after they have already taken
many of their GenEd courses. If we included these courses as concentration courses we would have
to tell the students that they have to re-take GenEd courses they thought they already took. Also,
because these courses are in other departments, IDS has no control over when the courses are run
and how many sections are offered, so we thought that it was important to give students more
freedom to decide what goes where and not posing limits. Question: we need to have course lists for
these different categories. Answer: That list was in the original proposal and it was circulated to all
impacted departments. The list will be included. The course list is in the degree tracker and is
updated regularly.
With some discussion and few changes (e.g., changing the hours for the Humanities and Social
Science Perspectives to say "6-9 credits"; including the course list as an attachment to this
proposal), the vote to approve the Interdisciplinary Studies Department packet 14:173-14:174 was
unanimous
D. POLITICAL SCIENCE DEPARTMENT (10/3/13) (Group A, S. Matchak and W-II, OC,
PGR, CS, HP, WC, 10/18/13)
(14:085 - 14:099 are Existing Course, gen ed)
POL101-Understanding the Political World-Change in Course (CS)
14:085
POL110H-Honors Seminar: Topics in Political Science-Change in Course (CS)
14:086
POL201-Introduction to American Politics-Change in Course (CS)
14:087
POL219-Introduction to Public Policy-Change in Course (OC)
14:088
POL251-Introduction to International Relations-Change in Course (HP)
14:089
POL306-Political Communication-Change in Course (OC)
14:091
POL311-The New American Conservatism-Change in Course (PGR/W-II) (tabled) 14:092
POL356-International Security-Change in Course (CS)
14:095
POL375-Politics of the Middle East-Change in Course (WC)
14:098
Stephen Matchak made a motion to approve the Political Science Department packet 14:08514:089, 14:091-14:092, 14:095, 14:098; Christopher Mauriello seconded.
Kanishkan Sathasivam was the representative from the Political Science Department.
Discussion: Proposals 14:085-14:089, 14:091, 14:095, and 14:098 were supported by all involved
subcommittees; however, neither the W-II subcommittee nor the PGR subcommittee expressed
support for proposal 14:092. Because the representatives from the Political Science Department were
not aware of this and had not been given the opportunity to address the concerns, the CC members
had a lively discussion about the need for transparency, better communication, and opportunities for
all stakeholders to get involved. There was concern that the W-II category Liaison, who is not a
member of the CC, had provided written comments which were not seen by other members of W-II
subcommittee (who are members of the CC) or the Political Science Department. The PGR category
liaison (not a member of the CC) made his disapproval known verbally to the CC liaison for the
proposal but not to the department, to whom he allegedly indicated that the course was fine. It is not
clear whether the CC members of the PGR subcommittee were involved. The CC members agreed
that vested GedEd subcommittees need to provide clear written documentation regarding their
decisions and the department needs an opportunity to make corrections. In this situation, the
department did not get any feedback. The process needs to be transparent and iterative. Because only
CC members of the GenEd subcommittees are the contract committee members, they (rather than the
non-contract GenEd subcommittee members) need to share feedback with the CC liaison in a way
that can be tracked, and the liaison needs to work with the department to make any needed
adjustments. Without written documentation we cannot make good decisions. Our action plan on
this was to have the CC chair articulate to the CRS and gen ed advisory groups that 1. All advisory
members need to be involved; 2. Written feedback is needed; and 3. Let a CC member
coordinate.
Megan Miller made a motion for a friendly amendment to the original proposal: to table
14:092 pending written clarifications from the full PGR and the full W-II subcommittees about
what needed to be addressed. The friendly amendment calls for approval of the packet without
proposal 14:092. Elizabeth Blood seconded.
With much discussion and no changes, the vote to approve the Political Science Department
packet as amended (14:085-14:089, 14:091, 14:095, 14:098) was unanimous
There being no other business, Megan Miller moved to adjourn the meeting; Zachary Newell
seconded. The vote to adjourn was unanimous, and the committee adjourned at 4:32 PM.
Submitted by __________________________________
Kathleen Hess (recorder)