FYE & LC Faculty Oversight Committee Minutes
April 5th, 2012
First Year Programs and Learning Communities Conference Room CUE 234
2:00-3:30pm
Present: Steven Zinn (ANSC), Scott Brown (EPSY), Jaci Van Heest (EPSY – Public Health House), Mark
Westa (CANR – EcoHouse), Cliff Nelson (BUSN), Crystal Park (EPSY)
Ex Officio Members Present: David Ouimette, Maria Martinez, Kevin Sullivan, Melissa Foreman
Not in Attendance: Tom Recchio (ENGL)
I. Approval of Minutes from March 8th Meeting
Mark Westa made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 8th meeting. Jaci Van Heest
seconded the motion. All were in favor. Motion carries, the minutes from the March 8th meeting
were approved.
II. Old Business
a. University Senate Update – UNIV approval
 David Ouimette said that at the university senate meeting UNIV designation was
approved
o Next step: UNIV courses will go to Hedley Freak – head of UICC, will then
bring to Senate Courses and Curriculum committee, then will go to full
senate for approval
 Steve Zinn asked: at last UICC meeting, Hedley expressed intended UNIV courses
approved by committee, would courses go forth together for senate courses and
curriculum?
o David Ouimette said that he will check – may still have issues around
grading. Hedley may not be able to move through all together, but not sure
o Timeframe for all of this is next year
III. New Business
a. INTD 1820 Faculty/Student Seminar
 Brought back INTD 1820 to this meeting – taught only by faculty. David Ouimette
has provided historical list of faculty who have taught these. Will bring before UICC
Monday. Added two syllabi – Scott Brown and Steve Wisensale with short summary
of classes taught in past. Used to be many more sections – hopefully more in the
future
o Crystal Park asked why not as many sections
 David Ouimette answered there is a shortage of faculty – pressure
on department heads – some in the past championed this concept
and were involved but are now retired.
 Fred Mauyanski used to help identify faculty. Growing
honors program has also affected faculty involvement in our
program
 Assistant Professor usually wouldn’t teach these – falls on
Associate/Full professors
o
Steve Zinn asked if there was more discussion for INTD 1820 – seemed like it
was a solid one
o Kevin Sullivan said that the suggestion made that we present 1820/1830
together as a package is a much more intense process – 1820 is a brand new
course. UICC said start from scratch – so pushing 1820 and then going back
 Steve Zinn said this makes sense. Finish up these approvals before
bringing new course forward – takes so much time.
 Maria Martinez said should take advantage of the fact that there
are receptive ears in UICC – if dynamics change may change the
tone of future meetings
 Steve Zinn asked if 1820 classes were now taught by non-faculty.
o David Ouimette said that grandfathered in classes from fall already set up
and that goal is to work toward putting 1820 in place for next fall
 Nothing new from non-faculty will be accepted until then
 U Can Cook at UConn, Willena Price’s courses, etc would be
grandfathered in
 Do they fit in another category? Or do people find other
homes for courses?
o Cliff Nelson asked if then these programs will be destroyed. Steve Zinn
answered that he hopes they won’t be.
o David Ouimette suggested that U Can Cook at UConn could go to a nutrition
grad student. May be places for others. Challenge with 1820 is an
administrative challenge. They require special training/support
 Jaci Van Heest said that Sally Reis is supportive
 Steve Zinn said that the committee has no standing, no senate
authorization
 Jaci Van Heest said that they are working on senate authorization:
same courses and curriculum form all online but never meet again
 Steve Zinn said it is all in digital measures
 David Ouimette asked if the committee wanted to vote on 1820 or reside on the last
vote
o Steve Zinn said that if there are no changes, no vote is needed.
b. INTD 1830 New Course Proposal FYE Topics in Student Success
 David Ouimette said that he will bring forward an 1830 course proposal
c. INTD 1998 Service Learning in the LC’s
 Hedley Freake is trying to sort out all INTD classes – what belongs to who. Wants
them attached to a program and wants us to vet them with 1998 – service learning
for Learning Communities
o 3 Learning Communities do this now (1 credit, pass/fail class – maybe more
LCs in the future).
o Proposal from last year approved temporary through UICC (2-year
extension)
 Steve Zinn said this was fine for LCs but there are a lot of places looking to set up
learning community courses on campus – your office shouldn’t vet these. Is it
creating a target for these courses before we have other things approved
o How are these courses used?



Mark Westa said that EcoHouse uses it to put program into practice:
what students are learning through EcoHouse and broadly through
university
 Courses includes service projects, reflections, provides
context for what students are learning. Students must
complete 32 hours a seminar – some community activities,
some activity service for a group.
 Cliff Nelson asked what kind of service activities?
o Mark Westa said Eco restoration, volunteering at
middle/elementary schools, range of topics
o Cliff Nelson asked if there was training before
 Mark Westa said sometimes – community
partner describes what they’re doing/why
and students write papers
 Jaci Van Heest said that Public Health House is similar. There is one
different piece though – group activities are tied to what’s going on
in 1810 from curricular perspective or individual activities –
community outreach, self-identified activities, etc.
 Cliff Nelson sees parallels to accounting service course (tax
returns for community with training)
David Ouimette asked what to name 1998
o Steve Zinn said that now 1998 = special topics. Do we want a service
learning course? As we add other sections – they are new sections. Should
not be special topics. Should they stand alone as 1850?
o Cliff Nelson asked if these courses would have training
 Steve Zinn said that every program handles training differently. It
would be a service learning component to many of our LCs. This
would allow for more flexibility, not a dumping ground for every
program that can cause issues.
 Maria Martinez said this was the issue Hedley was bringing
up – variable topics
 Melissa Foreman said that special topics is temporary.
Course can be permanent.
 Steve Zinn said it’s not appropriate for every program to go
through FYP for approval if it doesn’t fit with what FYP does
 Maria Martinez said there needs to be a clear distinction for
courses in FYPLC: being reviewed by Faculty Course Review
Committee Board, training – this is all generating a lot more
work
David Ouimette said he will bring service learning back as course approval
o Cliff Nelson asked if it doesn’t get approval, what would be another option?
Sounds like other categories are close to this
 Steve Zinn said there are other programs outside FYPLC. What
others do with a service component is separate. We don’t have to
administer it. Opportunity to set it up a new way to secure our
programs.


David Ouimette said sometimes people will get grants including
service component (Strong-CT) for 1st year underrepresented
students – would come to FYP to set up as 1820. Perhaps should be
in department. LSAMP doesn’t have curricular home – there are
multiple departments.
Steve Zinn suggested we create a structure/system for instructor
certification
 Loose in definition = success of program. Approval may not
allow for this
 David Ouimette said innovation – pilot something that then
is put into department
o Steve Zinn said that exists, department special
topics or UNIV course not approved in FYP&LC.
Define our program: who is involved, oversight.
o Maria Martinez said that this will force people to
pursue other options, not take easy way out. We
may be able to assist people
o Scott Brown said historically we place what we
value at risk = interpreted by UICC as lack of rigor
o Steve Zinn said the ones we have rejected have
found other homes
IV. Future Agenda Items
a. Member Terms
 David Ouimette said he will talk to each member individually. He said he is
struggling with the selection of faculty – what should the process be? Should he ask
Dean’s office to appoint faculty? Or should Sally Reis’s people?
o Scott Brown suggested David looks at distribution, where do you want
people from? No redundancy (Jaci and Scott are from same department).
Where is our major usage? 2 people from CLAS. Who is teaching from
English/Fine Arts? Is there a specific college representation? Nominations?
o Cliff Nelson asked what is the criteria/what are we looking for in person?
Who does what? If you don’t want to rely on Dean’s to pick, criteria is
helpful to pick people who make sense.
o David Ouimette said first, what is the school/college representation?
 Scott Brown suggested life sciences – bio/pharmacy?
 David Ouimette said that curricular committees don’t work in the summer – Steve
Zinn said that after May 9th they don’t work as grades are due then
o David Ouimette suggested one more meeting is fine for the semester?
Everyone said yes.
 Lunch will be provided
b. Certification Update
 Next meeting will be certifying instructors
o Need to inform instructors of new procedures – approve in May for Fall
o Part is how current instructors did



Steve Zinn said before May meeting, Dave/chair will go through and make
recommendations: keep, don’t keep, intervention group. Place for temporary
certification. Prepare before meeting to make review by group easier
o Need four faculty votes for certification. In meeting? By Email?
 Scott Brown said electronically fine with multiple people approving.
Keep, why. Don’t keep, why. Intervention group why.
Steve Zinn asked about training
o David Ouimette said he is putting it together to bring before committee.
Lesa Von Munkwitz-Smith, who previously did training, retired. Currently
interviewing to replace her but plan on training in May. We’re not approving
faculty.
 Steve Zinn said no, those with PhD/terminal degree in academic
department don’t need approval. Some PhDs need approval (staff).
Faculty affiliation may not need to review because they teach within
department (adjunct) – such as Willena Price
 David Ouimette asked if she could do a faculty/student
seminar.
o Jaci Van Heest and Scott Brown said yes. HigherEd
PhD folks – affiliated faculty teaching in programs
have terminal degree.
 David Ouimette asked if reviewing adjuncts?
 Steve Zinn said if they have their terminal degree, no
 David Ouimette asked if adjuncts and instructors were different
 Scott Brown said adjuncts have a terminal degree,
instructors do not
 David Ouimette asked about Keat Sanford
 Jaci Van Heest said he may have an affiliation with another
department
 Scott Brown said will put on candidate to demonstrate that
qualified to teach from other department. ROTC – military science
rank
 Mark Westa said adjuncts can be strange situation
 Steve Zinn said there’s no obligation to say yes – even for someone
with terminal degree. If someone has a terminal degree and gets 4’s
– wouldn’t want to approve them.
 Scott Brown asked if there were adjuncts willing to teach for free
 David Ouimette said there have been some who have
taught. Maybe more in LCs. We’ll work toward setting up
system/a timeframe for setting up a system
Scott Brown motioned to adjourn. Jaci Van Heest seconded. All in favor. Meeting
adjourned.