General Education Committee
Report to the
Bloomington Faculty Council
Sonya Stephens
Munirpallam A. Venkataramanan
General Education Committee Co-Chairs, October 16, 2012.
GenEd Bulletin 2011-12
Undergraduate Beginner Enrollment 2004-2012
Undergraduate Beginner
7800
7613
7564
7600
7424
7400
7252
7200
7327
7198
7020
6949
7000
6800
6600
6400
6352
6200
6000
5800
5600
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
GenEd by the numbers
STUDENTS
Total number of beginners in Fall 2012: 7,613 (up 2.5%
from 2011)
Total student enrollments in GenEd classes in Fall 2012:
82,109 (up from 75,264 in 2011)
Number of beginners in Fall 2012 entering with
sophomore status (26 cr. or more): up 15.5% to 402
[348 in 2011 (an increase of 95% from 2010)]
GenEd by the numbers
COURSES
Courses approved for the GenEd Curriculum: 881
Course proposals reviewed for the GenEd Curriculum:
1518
Course proposals not approved for the GenEd Curriculum:
637 (482 of which were 300-400 level courses)
GenEd classes offered in Fall 2012: 2,333
Distribution of Courses in the Common Ground
Comp
MM
A&H
S&H
W Culture
W Langs
N&M
N&M*
GenEd Courses by School
Total Courses
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
College
Music
HPER
INFO
EDUC
SPEA
SWK
MSCI
JOUR
BUS
OPT
Total Courses
Top 15 Courses by Enrollment
Math
PSY
ENG
MATH
ECON
BUS
BUS
BUS
BUS
SOC
BUS
MATH
MUS
COLL
CMCL
M118
P101
W131
M119
E201
K201
A100
L201
T175
S100
C104
M211
I500
C103
C121
Finite Mathematics
Introductory Psychology
Elementary Composition
Brief Survey of Calculus
Intro to Microeconomics
The Computer in Business
Basic Accounting Skills
Legal Environment in Business
The Individual
Intro to Sociology
Business Presentations
Calculus I
Performance and Composition Masterclass
Critical Approaches to Arts & Sciences
Public Speaking
3801
2798
2051
1832
1778
1765
1569
1286
1199
986
971
968
944
928
923
Key points about Course Enrollment and GenEd
Course Availability

SLST-T101 English Language Improvement went
from 1059 enrollments in Fall 2011 (14th) to 864 in
Fall 2012 (20th), despite an increase in international
student numbers.

17 of the top 25 courses this year are GenEd
courses (up from 14/25 last year).

GenEd courses are highly enrolled but seats are still
available.
GenEd Course Availability
Course
Number of classes/
Capacity
English Composition
Mathematical Modeling
Total Enrollment Percent full
121/2,528
2,498
98.8
88/7,657
7,582
99.0
GenEd A & H
536/15,316
14,435
94.2
GenEd S & H
495/25,623
22,422
87.5
GenEd N & M
512/24,279
22,822
94.0
GenEd World Languages
415/8,486
6,863
80.9
GenEd World Cultures
166/6,967
6,487
93.1
GenEd by the numbers
Articulation of Advanced Placement Credit
Number of beginners in Fall 2012 entering with articulated AP
credit: 3033 (40% of cohort)
Number of credit hours resulting from AP articulation: 28,084
Average hours for students with AP credit: 9.1
Percentage of AP credits in GenEd Common Ground: 48%
GenEd by the numbers
Articulation of ACP (IU Dual) Credit
Number of beginners in Fall 2012 entering with articulated ACP
credit: 93 (7% of cohort)
Number of credit hours resulting from ACP articulation: 499
Average hours for students with ACP credit: 5.4
GenEd by the numbers
Articulation of other transfer credit (excludes IU campuses)
Number of transfer students in Fall 2012 entering with credit:
1010
Number of credit hours resulting from articulation of transfer
credit: 11,597.5
Average hours for students with other transfer credit: 11.5
Percentage of transfer credits in GenEd Common Ground: 68%
Summer Enrollment in GenEd Courses

IUB enrolled students in 2,735 hours of GenEd
credit in Summer 2012 (cohort of 2011)

IU Regional campuses enrolled students in 1,654
hours of GenEd credit to IUB students in Summer
2012 (cohort of 2011)
Key Points




While the number of beginners has increased by 2.5% from last
year, the number of beginners entering with enough credits to be
a sophomore (26-55 cr.) has increased by 15.5%.
In Fall 2012, 5.3% of beginners entered at the sophomore level
(26-55 cr.).
40% of Fall 2012 beginners (3033) entered with AP credit, but only
5% of transfer and intercampus transfer students entered with AP
credit.
During Summer 2012, IUB students (cohort of 2011) took 1654 cr.
of GenEd courses at IU regional campuses. Of these 1654 cr., 750
cr. were in Mathematical Modeling courses, 468 cr. were in S&H
courses, 225 cr. were in N&M NS courses, and 111 cr. were in
English Composition
Statewide Transferable GenEd Core (STGEC)
SEA 182
Each state educational institution, in collaboration with the
commission for higher education, shall:
(1) not later than December 1, 2012, create and report to the
commission for higher education a statewide transfer general education
core, to be implemented not later than May 15, 2013.
The core must be based upon a set of core competencies, translated into
at least thirty (30) semester credit hours in areas agreed upon by the
state educational institutions, which apply for credit toward
undergraduate degrees, including associate degrees and baccalaureate
degrees at all campuses of state educational institutions.
SEA 182
(2) jointly establish statewide standards for use by all state
educational institutions to document an individual's
completion of the statewide transfer general education core
on the individual's transcripts
SEA 182
5(a) After May 15, 2013, an individual who has satisfactorily
completed the statewide transfer general education core at
a state educational institution, as indicated on the
individual's official transcript, may not be required to
complete additional courses in the statewide transfer
general education core at the state educational institution
to which the individual transfers, regardless of whether the
individual has received an associate degree or the delivery
method of the statewide transfer general education core the
individual completed.
SEA 182
(b) If an individual does not complete the statewide transfer
general education core of a state educational institution
before transferring to another state educational institution,
the individual must complete the statewide transfer general
education core required by the state educational institution
to which the individual has transferred. The state
educational institution to which the individual has
transferred shall award credit to the individual for courses
the individual has satisfactorily completed, based on the
course to course equivalencies of the core transfer library
established under IC 21-42-5.
SEA 182
(c) An individual who holds an associate of arts or associate of
science degree approved by the commission who is
admitted to a four (4) year state educational institution is
considered to have met at least thirty (30) semester credit
hours of the state educational institution's general
education requirement.
SGETC Leadership Team’s Approach to SEA 182
The Principles
PRINCIPLES:
A. The Statewide GenEd core will be faculty-determined
B. It will be outcome based
C. It will be curriculum-implemented (not courses)
D. The priority goal: Students will be prepared to succeed.
E. Secondary goal: Mobility without penalty
The process will include trust (in individual campus
statements about curriculum, assessment and student
performance) but within three to five years there must be a
review process to verify quality. NB Completion of the
Statewide Core is not a guarantee of admission to any
institution.
The Process
•
•
•
•
•
Set of competencies to be established in core areas by faculty
from each campus.
Proposal by each campus which says how their GenEd
curriculum will meet the agreed statewide competencies.
Statement of what we will accept as evidence that the public
universities' curricula meet these competencies? (Student
learning and evidence-this refers to the principle that there be
evidence and verification of performance/quality)
Statement of how we determine that students in each
institution's GenEd curriculum are meeting those
competencies?
Verification of later success, or tracking of performance after
transfer.
The Basic Framework 1
The general competencies :
Quantitative reasoning
Written communication
Oral communication
The Basic Framework 2
Ways of knowing
- Scientific
- Humanistic and Artistic
- Historical
- Social/Behavioral
Additional Areas under Consideration:
Diversity/intercultural
Information literacy
Critical thinking
Side-by-side: IUB Common Ground and Statewide
General Education Transfer Core
SGETC
Written Communication
Quantitative Literacy
Oral Communication
-
Ways of Knowing
Scientific and natural sciences
Humanistic and Artistic
Historical
Social/Behavioral
IUB
English Composition
Mathematical Modeling
[Option in A & H]
Breadth of Inquiry
Natural & Mathematical Sciences
Arts & Humanities
Social & Historical
Determining the Student Learning Outcomes
Faculty Panels with a representative from each public
institution.
Sharing of outcomes from their own institution’s GenEd
and agreement on SGETC outcomes for each general
competency.
Agreeing on Standards of Performance
The process indicates a review of student success once the
STGEC is implemented.
Baseline competencies agreed in advance.
The LEAP VALUE Rubrics used to benchmark expectations.
LEAP VALUE RUBRIC
Written Communication
Capstone
4
3
Milestones
2
Benchmark
1
Context of and Purpose for Writing
Includes considerations of audience,
purpose, and the circumstances
surrounding the writing task(s).
Demonstrates a thorough
understanding of context, audience,
and purpose that is responsive to the
assigned task(s) and focuses all
elements of the work.
Demonstrates adequate consideration
of context, audience, and purpose
and a clear focus on the assigned
task(s) (e.g., the task aligns with
audience, purpose, and context).
Demonstrates awareness of context,
audience, purpose, and to the
assigned tasks(s) (e.g., begins to
show awareness of audience's
perceptions and assumptions).
Demonstrates minimal attention to
context, audience, purpose, and to
the assigned tasks(s) (e.g.,
expectation of instructor or self as
audience).
Content Development
Uses appropriate, relevant, and
compelling content to illustrate
mastery of the subject, conveying the
writer's understanding, and shaping
the whole work.
Uses appropriate, relevant, and
compelling content to explore ideas
within the context of the discipline
and shape the whole work.
Uses appropriate and relevant
Uses appropriate and relevant
content to develop and explore ideas content to develop simple ideas in
through most of the work.
some parts of the work.
Genre and Disciplinary Conventions
Formal and informal rules inherent in
the expectations for writing in
particular forms and/or academic
fields (please see glossary).
Demonstrates detailed attention to
and successful execution of a wide
range of conventions particular to a
specific discipline and/or writing task
(s) including organization, content,
presentation, formatting, and stylistic
choices
Demonstrates consistent use of
Follows expectations appropriate to a Attempts to use a consistent system
important conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing
for basic organization and
presentation.
specific discipline and/or writing
task(s) for basic organization,
content, and presentation
task(s), including organization,
content, presentation, and stylistic
choices
Sources and Evidence
Demonstrates skillful use of highquality, credible, relevant sources to
develop ideas that are appropriate for
the discipline and genre of the
writing
Demonstrates consistent use of
credible, relevant sources to support
ideas that are situated within the
discipline and genre of the writing.
Demonstrates an attempt to use
Demonstrates an attempt to use
credible and/or relevant sources to
sources to support ideas in the
support ideas that are appropriate for writing.
the discipline and genre of the
writing.
Control of Syntax and Mechanics
Uses graceful language that skillfully
communicates meaning to readers
with clarity and fluency, and is
virtually error-free.
Uses straightforward language that
generally conveys meaning to
readers. The language in the portfolio
has few errors.
Uses language that generally conveys Uses language that sometimes
meaning to readers with clarity,
impedes meaning because of errors
in usage.
although writing may include some
errors.
The IUB GenEd Committee Ballot, May 2012
GenEd Committee Members voted on each of the areas
proposed by the STGEC in May 2012.
Distinction was made between the Common Ground and the
Shared Goals. Ballot focused only on the way in the STGEC
compares to our Common Ground requirements.
An important distinction was made in Ways of Knowing
between a single broad category in which certain competencies
are assumed to have been met and individual categories which
do not map to the IUB areas in the Common Ground.
Ways of Knowing
This option, supported by the BL GenEd Committee, involves
gathering all four disciplinary categories into one “bucket,” titled
“Ways of Knowing” and corresponding directly to the IUB GenEd
Breadth of Inquiry category. This alternative to four separate
disciplinary categories was proposed by IUB to allow flexibility in
how the disciplinary categories are grouped (e.g., IUB groups
together Social and Historical Studies) while continuing to
acknowledge the importance of all four. We believe that the
STGEC can be designed following this “bucket” principle in such
a way that no changes would be required to the IUB Breadth of
Inquiry requirement (or, for that matter, the disciplinary breadth
requirements at most other Indiana public institutions).
English Composition
I Rhetorical Knowledge
By the end of first year composition, students should
• Focus on a purpose
• Respond to the needs of different audiences
• Respond appropriately to different kinds of rhetorical
situations
• Use conventions of format and structure appropriate to the
rhetorical situation
• Adopt appropriate voice, tone, and level of formality
• Understand how genres shape reading and writing
• Write in several genres
English Composition
II Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing
By the end of first year composition, students should
• Use writing and reading for inquiry, learning, thinking, and
communicating
• Understand a writing assignment as a series of tasks,
including finding, evaluating,
• analyzing, and synthesizing appropriate primary and
secondary sources
• Integrate their own ideas with those of others
• Understand the relationships among language, knowledge,
and power
English Composition
III Processes
By the end of first year composition, students should
• Be aware that it usually takes multiple drafts to create and complete a
successful text
• Develop flexible strategies for generating, revising, editing, and proofreading
• Understand writing as an open process that permits writers to use
later invention and re• thinking to revise their work
• Understand the collaborative and social aspects of writing processes
• Learn to critique their own and others' works
• Learn to balance the advantages of relying on others with the
responsibility of doing their part
• Use a variety of technologies to address a range of audiences
English Composition
IV Knowledge of Conventions
By the end of first year composition, students should
• Learn common formats for different kinds of texts
• Develop knowledge of genre conventions ranging from
structure and paragraphing to
• tone and mechanics
• Practice appropriate means of documenting their work
• Control such surface features as syntax, grammar,
punctuation, and spelling
English Composition
V Composing in Electronic Environments
By the end of first year composition, students should:
• Use electronic environments for drafting, reviewing,
revising, editing, and sharing texts
• Locate, evaluate, organize, and use research material
collected from electronic sources, including scholarly
library databases; other official databases (e.g., federal
government
• databases); and informal electronic networks and internet
sources
• Understand and exploit the differences in the rhetorical
strategies and in the affordances
• available for both print and electronic composing processes
and texts
Quantitative Reasoning Competencies I
DRAFT ONLY
A foundational experience in quantitative reasoning will provide a
rigorous mathematical curriculum applied to real world problem
solving.
The outcomes should deepen, extend, or be distinct from high
school Core 40 mathematics competencies.
Upon completion, students will be able to:
1. Interpretation
• Explain information presented in mathematical form, e.g.
equations, graphs, diagrams, tables, words, geometric figures
• Critique arguments using mathematical reasoning
Quantitative Reasoning Competencies II
DRAFT continued
2. Representation
•
Represent information/data in various mathematical forms as
appropriate, e.g. symbolically, visually, numerically, and
verbally
3. Mathematical Processes
•
Apply mathematical processes and techniques to solve
properly formulated mathematical problems (e.g. algebraic,
geometric, logical and/or statistical methods)
Quantitative Reasoning Competencies III
DRAFT ONLY
4. Analysis
•
Analyze results of computations within the context of the
original problem
•
Determine reasonableness of solution
Quantitative Reasoning Competencies IV
DRAFT ONLY
5. Assumptions
• Communicate which assumptions have been made in the
solution process
• Determine a solution process and provide a compelling
rationale for choosing that process
• Illustrate the limitations of the process
6. Communication
•
Effectively explain the interpretation, representation,
solution, and conclusion of the mathematic problem.
Speaking and Listening Competency Outcomes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Use appropriate organization or logical sequencing to deliver an
oral message
Adapt an oral message for diverse audiences, contexts, and
communication channels
Identify and demonstrate appropriate oral and nonverbal
communication practices
Advance an oral argument using logical reasoning
Provide credible and relevant evidence to support an oral
argument
Demonstrate the ethical responsibilities of sending and receiving
oral messages
Summarize or paraphrase an oral message to demonstrate
comprehension
Science Competency
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Explain how scientific explanations are formulated, tested, and modified
or validated
Distinguish between scientific and non-scientific evidence and
explanations
Apply foundational knowledge and discipline-specific concepts to
address issues or solve
problems
Apply basic observational, quantitative, or technological methods to
gather data and
generate evidence-based conclusions
Use current models and theories to describe, explain, or predict natural
phenomena
Locate reliable sources of scientific evidence to construct arguments
related to real-world issues
Humanistic-Artistic Competency Outcomes
Students will be able to:
• Recognize and describe humanistic, historical, or artistic works or problems and
patterns of the human experience.
• Apply disciplinary methodologies, epistemologies, and traditions of the humanities
and the arts, including the ability to distinguish primary and secondary sources.
• Analyze and evaluate texts, objects, events, or ideas in their cultural, intellectual or
historical contexts.
• Analyze the concepts and principles of various types of humanistic or artistic
expression.
• Create, interpret, or reinterpret artistic and/or humanistic works through
performance or criticism.
• Develop arguments about forms of human agency or expression grounded in
rational analysis and in an understanding of and respect for spatial, temporal, and
cultural contexts.
• Analyze diverse narratives and evidence in order to explore the complexity of
human experience across space and time.
Assessment of Student Learning
Sharing the Data
Faculty are required to share data from just one assignment with
GEMS.
 Assignment should measure one or more of the learning
outcomes relevant to the course and aligned with the rubric from
the pertinent area of the Common Ground.
 To make this meaningful, there must be a rubric map for the
assignment that is also shared with GEMS.
 Data should be reviewed by the faculty member with a view to
evaluating the effectiveness of the student learning so that, where
necessary or appropriate, changes can be made.
 Data will also be shared with GEMS so that campus-wide outcome
aggregation and analysis can occur.

Timeline for GenEd Monitoring
Years of 1st GenEd
Assessment*
Area to be monitored
1 2011-12
English Composition
Mathematical Modeling
2 2012-13
World Languages & World Cultures
3 2013-14
Natural & Mathematical Sciences
4 2014-15
Arts & Humanities
5 2015-16
Social & Historical Studies
Shared Goals
Ongoing
* Annually thereafter
Curricular & Program Review
Math Modeling Assessment
Example: M118
Learning objectives for Mathematics 118 include but
are not limited to the following:
1. Students should become proficient in using
combinatorics and probability to model problems in a
variety of applied areas. This includes identifying which
problems can be solved using such methods, solving the
resulting mathematical problems, and drawing
qualitative conclusions from the numerical solutions.
M118
2. Students should become proficient in modeling
using systems of linear equations in a variety of
applied areas. This includes creating variables,
translating information about the relationships among
these variables into linear equations, incorporating
other given data, solving the resulting mathematical
problems, and drawing qualitative conclusions from
the numerical solutions.
M118
3. Students should become proficient in modeling linear
decision-making problems in settings drawn both from
business and from everyday experience. This includes
creating variables, translating given constraint
information into linear inequalities, incorporating given
data, solving the resulting linear optimization problem,
and deducing optimal decision choices by analysis and
by graphical representation of the constraints.
Sample Question
A test for use of a certain illegal drug is 95% accurate, which
means that 95% of users will test positive and 95% of
nonusers will test negative. It is known that, in the broad
population under consideration, 3% are users. Suppose that
an individual tests positive. How likely is that he actually is a
user? If this is a test taken by college athletes for use of
performance-enhancing drugs, would you exclude this
individual from competition? If this is a test taken by airline
pilots for use of impairment-inducing drugs, would you
board the airplane?
Assessment of English Composition
Aggregation of Outcomes using iRubric
Aggregation of assessment data using
iRubric for Comparative Literature
Faculty feedback on the process
From English:
From Comparative Literature:
“We are indeed interested in
using iRubric again this
semester, based on what I
believe was an overall
painless experience for us
(both the administrators who
told the AIs to do it and for
the AIs who did so).”
“The data collection and
iRubrics usage were a success
and I am happy to continue to
use this software for future
Gen-Ed reporting for CMLT-C
110.”
Assessment of World Languages and
World Cultures
Stage 1: Fall 2012
 Collection of learning outcomes, syllabi, assignments
and rubrics for WL & WC GenEd Courses
 RFP, Review and Acquisition of Assessment
Management Software
Stage 2: Spring & Summer 2013
 Implementation of Assessment Management Software
 Collection of data
Acknowledgements
Munirpallam Venkataramanan, Co-Chair
Michael Lundell, OVPUE
Linda Shepard, Mike Sauer, and Stefano Fiorini and Erika Knudsen
Bloomington Assessment & Research
Chairs of the GenEd Common Ground Subcommittees: Kathy
Smith, Kevin Pilgrim, Jonathan Michaelsen, Peter Todd, Margot
Gray.
Members of the IUB GenEd Committee
Members of the GenEd Monitoring Subcommittee (GEMS)
Faculty members in the Departments of Mathematics, English, and
Comparative Literature, especially Kevin Pilgrim, Dana
Anderson, and Jeff Johnson, who coordinated the assessment
efforts.