Core Education Committee

Voting members present: Geoffrey Barstow, Abigail Crowell, Kelsey Emard, Daniel Faltesek, Colin Johnson, Matthew Kennedy, Brian Mills, Rene Reitsma, Randy Rosenberger, Paula Weiss
Voting members absent: Aidas Banaitis, Lori McGraw, Kari-Lyn Sakuma
Ex-officio members present: Assessment & Accreditation – Heath Henry; Ecampus – Karen Watte; WIC – Sarah Perrault
Guests: Stephanie Baugh, Michael Jefferies, Kristin Nagy Katz

Course Reviews

• ATS 342 Frozen: Our Icey Planet in Climate and Societal Context – Seeking Solutions
  • Previously in the Baccalaureate Core
  • No textbooks; case studies provided.
  • Essential assignments for each Learning Outcome (LO) - paper; presentation; project; collection.
  • The course looks at the loss of polar ice caps and how it will affect climate and the impacts on society – how will they address the issues brought about by climate change and its impacts on society?
  • One minor concern over LO 4 – it seemed initially unclear in how it was assessed
  • Part of scoring is based on observation, but it is unclear who is doing the observation. There did not seem to be enough information about critiquing the group work.
  • Overall, it seems to be a good course, but could use a little more detail on LO 4.

Action: Motion to send back and request more detail on how they will assess teamwork in LO 4; seconded. The motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• HDFS 240 Human Sexuality – Social Science
  • LO 1 not well explained in CIM
  • The first essential assignment states it will be a paper, but it does not mention which paper will be the assignment.
  • LO 3 invites several legal issues; the questions are incredibly personal, invasive and potentially triggering about a deeply personal topic.
    • The syllabus does not mention the nature of this assignment – it is only mentioned in CIM.
  • Another major issue is that the course does not link back to any institution – even looking past the issues with its responses to the CIM questions, it does not fit the category.

Action: Motion to send back citing the issues with LO 1 and the serious concerns around LO 3. Suggest they approach General Counsel about serious issues around the assignment in LO 3 and mandatory reporting status. The motion passed with 10 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• TA 147 Introduction to the Theatre – Arts & Humanities – General
  • Course syllabi for both on campus and Ecampus titles do not match what is in CIM.
  • Ecampus syllabus lists a design element students need to create, but the Corvallis syllabus does not seem to have a design element mentioned.
    • Ecampus still needs a re-development proposal for this course. It has been a long time since they have seen it come through for formal work.

Action: Motion to send back – match titles; clarify what the creative assignment is on campus; send Ecampus syllabus for redevelopment; seconded. The motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• WR 121Z Writing Composition I – Writing Foundations
  • No concerns.

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

• (R) GEO 100 Natural Disasters: Hollywood Versus Reality – Scientific Inquiry
  • Asked to clarify the essential assignment for LO 1
    • The essential assignment was updated in CIM was updated to paper, but the syllabus has not changed and now they do not match.

Action: Motion to send back and request clarification on the syllabus and ensure the syllabus is consistent with what is in CIM; seconded. The motion passed with 8 votes in favor, 1 vote in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• (R) PS 207 Political Communication – Communication, Media, Society
  • Asked to clarify how they met criteria 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 of the Learning Outcome, Criteria, and Rationale Report (LOCR).
    • They did make some clarifications in CIM, but nothing seemed to be changed in the syllabus.
  • Its unclear if the final exam is an oral exam, except for one small statement, but other statements seem to indicate that it might not be oral. No statements indicate if the oral statements are live and synchronous.

Action: Motion to send back and ask that they reflect all the CIM changes in the syllabus and ask proposer to address CIM comments and fixing the typo in the title; seconded. The motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• (R) PPOL 201 Introduction to Public Policy – Social Science
  • Reads as a policy formation course.
  • Seems focused on institution, rather than human behavior.
  • Content around human behavior feels more implied or assumed.
  • LO 3 and 2 have undergone some revision and there is some improvement in LO 2, but overall, there is not enough to approve the course for the category.
  • Discuss further next week.
• (R) BI 101 Environmental Biology: Ecology, Conservation, Global Change – Scientific Inquiry
  • Will be discussed next week.
• (R) BI 103 Human Biology: The Human Body, Health and Disease – Scientific Inquiry
  • Will be discussed next week.
• (R) Z 102 Animal Biology: Genes, Behavior and Evolution of Life – Scientific Inquiry
  • Will be discussed next week.