Core Curriculum Subcommittee—Boose/Foster
9/15/09
Boose David
Jeannot, Mary
Presley, Patrick
Foster, Boyd
Jones, Anna
Prindle, Gina
Foster-Dow, Susan
McCormick, Megan
Siejk, Kate
Haid, Amanda
Miller, Jeff
Steverson, Brian
Henning, Brian
Nedderman, Stefania
Thomas, Anne
Hess, Steve
Patty, Allen
Wagner, John
First 20-30 minutes of meeting mostly spent on clarification of the charge of the committee; the topic of
the baccalaureate outcomes.
Part of this time was spent in questions regarding what was included in the lead sentence and the 6
“areas” listed, and what was not. There was interest in examining this section’s inclusions and exclusions
(for example, why are arts detached from humanities, math from sciences, etc.).
Attendees were redirected toward the concept of “what do we want our students to be like, and how
far are we toward achieving this.” Someone summarized that what we were really after was an
assessment evaluation.
In examining these outcomes, many identified classes rather than competencies. For example, it was
pointed out that a class in “science” is not in the “core” indicating a hole in current core.
Most agreed that “Humanities” is too broad and is met across several areas, including the core and
majors; it is pointed out that “core” experience/curriculum differs depending on what school a student
is in (indicates that the “common core” is anything but). Several pointed out that much of
Jesuit/humanist tradition is better met/expanded upon through co-curricular activities (ex: Freshman
Retreat).
There was much discussion regarding human culture, with the admission of many
definitions/perceptions of what human culture (“Culture”) means. Culture is loaded word; perhaps we
mean “human experience”? HC does occur in some parts of the core: should be integrated in every class
but is not…there was discussion regarding “other cultures” and a sense of agreement that students
come in with their cultural experiences fairly limited to home/friends/school; some pointed out the
homogeneity of GU and how this makes it difficult for students to “understand” other cultures. Their
cultural knowledge has to do with culture they grew up in, and what we expose them to here is often
very similar to home. Lack of experience with “the other”, seems to be less diverse than it should be,
perhaps a too western bias. Is “classroom culture” part of human culture? Need to address lack of
culture understanding across the curriculum, seeing a lack of open understanding even by the time they
are seniors. One person says his seniors do have knowledge of these things, and it is from the arts and
sciences core. General agreement that they don’t have knowledge of cultures by the time they leave
here. Don’t think university core has enough to say we meet the knowledge component surrounding
other cultures. At least one attendee indicated a study of foreign language as part of understanding a
culture.
Attendees were asked to reconsider the charge for today: that it was about knowledge, that
“understanding” and “experiencing” and growth may be addressed in the other 3 meetings. Some
wanted to change knowledge to “understanding” and a brief conversation ensued about what
“understand” means and how it would be measured.
It was put forth that math/science is some part of philosophy.
Core Curriculum Subcommittee—Boose/Foster
9/15/09
Jesuit/humanist need to be stressed more (unclear whether this was about knowledge or
practice/understanding/experience). “It all starts with professors and how they integrate Jesuit
humanist goals into syllabi, present them in core and in some majors.” Needs more focus on achieving
this, as it separates GU from other universities (from student member).
Noted that many students drawing upon club meetings and other co-curricular experiences as examples
of where they get knowledge. Seems to be some agreement that knowledge, especially of cultures, may
come from co-curricular experiences. One student noted how freshman retreat made the difference
between staying at GU and leaving, but unclear how this was related to “knowledge”. A general sense
that co-curricular experiences have value towards the outcomes…however, it is noted that some
student majors are so loaded that students can’t or won’t be able to participate in co-curricular activities
fully. It is suggested that it is Important that the “initial core” encourages some experiences outside of
classes.
We need to say what we want to be and enshrine that in ALL curriculum; it is suggested that unless a
student is in A and S, he/she doesn’t get a foreign language/global culture class.
General consensus that these are NOT represented for every student. Due to number of
classes/requirements in a major, a sense that these need to be carried across curriculum in all areas.
Seems that students are often discouraged from service/culture options due to focus on major. If we
are saying it is important, then need to ensure it happens.
Knowledge is at issue today (brief allusion to Bloom’s Taxonomy); then there is a brief discussion
regarding is knowledge just info, or understanding. Attendees seem generally to want to address
engagement and understanding as part of knowledge.
Business groups don’t get knowledge of other cultures (from business student); he got more back home
in Texas, he got knowledge of human culture from travel abroad ; physical and natural world got that
more through working with groups, communicating with different people and working in teams. Jesuit
traditions he got through philosophy classes (which he enjoyed). The frosh retreat felt like there was a
community formed there, mainly philosophy and religion classes gave him the knowledge of
Jesuit/humanistic, the retreat just gave THE EXPERIENCE.
(Student input) “Through GU you can experience different cultures through students here, and through
the experiences classes offer; I am a special ed major, so I got the chance to communicate with other
people on campus and off in my experiences.”
General outcome: Students in different schools have different experiences; to achieve common
outcomes, a “core” definitely needs to be addressed in every school across the curriculum. If coming
from an area where less involved in extracurricular, we need to ensure experience happens somewhere
else.