Core Education Committee

Voting members present: Aidas Banaitis, Abigail Crowell, Kelsey Emard, Colin Johnson, Lori McGraw, Brian Mills, Rene Reitsma, Randy Rosenberger, Kari-Lyn Sakuma, Paula Weiss
Voting members absent: Geoffrey Barstow, Daniel Faltesek, Matthew Kennedy
Ex-officio members present: Assessment & Accreditation – Heath Henry; Core Education – McKenzie Huber; Ecampus – Karen Watte; Difference, Power & Oppression – Natchee Barnd; WIC – Sarah Perrault
Guests: Michael Jefferies

Course reviews

• BHS 345 Biological Basis of Neuropathology (WIC – new course proposal)
  • The informal writing was not very clear in the CIM, but the information could be found elsewhere. The class is otherwise very well put together.

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. Motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• CH 121 General Chemistry (Scientific Inquiry and Analysis)
  • There is an issue Learning Outcome (LO) 3 – societal relevance.
    • Addressed in passing but does not seem apparent in assignments or discussions.
  • Cascades syllabus has a very clear typo related to the name of the category.
    • Heath noted the typo wasn’t always there – it may be a Word formatting issue that occurs when downloading.
  • LO2 also seemed insufficient – cyclical process seemed unclear in how it was measured.
  • The lab + recitation adds up to 23%, but isn’t the lab portion supposed to add up to 25%?
    • “Lab component must constitute at least 25% of the 4-credit course grade or 20% of a 5-credit course grade. If a recitation is experiential, that grade may be encompassed within the 20-25% of the course grade."
      • Request more detail on how the recitation is experiential and what the lab includes.
      • If it isn’t clear in the syllabus now – it won’t be clear in an audit later.
  • They are dropping a math pre-requisite, so is there enough support to ensure the students can pass the course.

Action: Motion to send back and request: 1) Provide more detail on how LO2 and LO3 are addressed and make them syllabus visible; 2) provide more detail on what is done in labs across all modalities and how the recitations are experiential; and 3) address the question about Math in the CIM comments; seconded. Motion passed with 8 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 1 abstention.

• REL 216 Newer Religions of the World (Arts and Humanities – General)
  • The proposer is looking into alternatives for the Netflix subscription.
    • Does it comply with HB2119? Can it be brought into compliance?
      • The bookstore is working on options, like Verba Collect.
    • It’s not a large expense compared to other resources.

Action: Motion to approve with suggestions to find an alternative option for accessing the video; seconded. Motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• HDFS 233 Introduction to the field of early childhood (Beyond OSU I & II)
  • How do we evaluate a 0-credit course for two categories?
  • Does Transitions need to be a pre- or co-requisite?
    • It depends on the status of the student and whether they are a transfer student.
    • How is it monitored and implemented?
    • It’s added at the CIM stage, but until courses are added in, we will just have to keep an eye on it.
      • They can put something into the field, but CIM will note it as an unverified/unapproved course.
  • Issues:
    • Stray asterisks that don’t reference anything.
    • Recommendations for failure of the course if students are caught sharing documents online.
      • Some colleges do it as a statement of academic integrity. Perhaps rewording it would make it sound less threatening.
      • It is somewhat misleading in the language in that there are other potential avenues to address the situation.

Action: Approve with note to add a Transitions course as a co-requisite when the option becomes available; change language regarding academic integrity; remove asterisk from LOs; seconded.  Motion passed with 8 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• PHS 104
  • More specific essential assignments were selected, and the proposal was sent back to the Curriculum Council with unanimous approval from the committee.

• BI 221, 222, 223
  • Courses back last week with requests for an explanation of non-OER material and greater clarity in the syllabi about which assignments were the essential assignments. In response they did the following:
    • Regarding OER, the proposer explained that they already use a low-cost option with a special price from the publisher, and that they have received a grant to evaluate OER alternatives next quarter.
    • Regarding the essential assignments for LO3 in all three courses, the proposer added detail to the syllabus indicating exactly which assignments were the essential assignments for each class and describing how they were submitted and evaluated.

Action: Motion to approve all BI 22X courses; seconded. Motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.