GE Minutes 4-8-2014

General Education Committee
8 Apr. 2014
In attendance: Richard Squire, Susan Larsen, Melanie Jenkins, Adam Larsen, Joseph
Papenfuss, Lafaun Barnhurst, Gregory Wright
I. Approval of Minutes (4-18-14): Joseph motioned for approval; Adam
seconded the motion. Unanimous vote.


II. Discussion Items


Syllabi approval process: We looked at the flow charts we updated last semester and talked about ways to inform faculty about the new requirements and process. We agreed that the chair will send out an email that covers the following issues: old versus new GE outcome numbers; the inclusion of outcomes 1, 2, and 6 in all GE syllabi; content and assessment linkage for both general education and content; feedback opportunities for student; directions to access the flow chart and the GE page; knowledge area criteria that were provided by divisions; SLOS need to connect to both the GE and knowledge area descriptors; catalog descriptors and SLOs must reflect knowledge area outcomes and GE outcomes; KPIs that illustrate outcomes are achieved. Most importantly, clarify that the core of a course being considered for general education credit must fulfill SLOs. Melanie will draft this email and we will revise it in our next meeting.


Adam reported that he has seen several “pots of interest” in the interdisciplinary model, and he suggested that interest will die out if we don’t move in the direction soon. We discussed the need to provide opportunities to discuss options and the necessity of incentives (time, money, workload) to make it happen. It was suggested that we call a meeting before the end of semester to find out who is willing to participate in an integrative model to help out the group going to the AAC&U general education institute.


We discussed options for the back to school workshop. Our recommendation is that we focus on assessment. We should provide training examples (in the form of experts, value rubrics and artifacts, or examples from departments currently excelling at assessment), provide opportunities to discuss and plan assessment for the upcoming year, and then follow up with an assessment day in May (as a contract day). The group going to Vermont should also report on their work.