Core Education Committee

Voting members present: Andrea Allan, Vipin Arora, Aidas Banaitis, Abigail Crowell, Liz Delf, Kelsey Emard, Daniel Faltesek, Matthew Kennedy, Lori McGraw, Brian Mills, Holly Mitchell, Kari-Lyn Sakuma, Paula Weiss
Voting members absent: None
Ex-officio members present: Core Education – McKenzie Huber; Curriculum Management – Stephanie Baugh; Difference, Power, and Oppression – Tenisha Tevis; Ecampus – Karen Watte; General Education Assessment – Heath Henry
Guests: Patrick Ball, Michael Jefferies, Andrew Valls

Difference, Power, and Oppression (DPO) Director

• Discussion:
  • How DPO-Foundations will serve as a pre-requisite for DPO-Advanced
    • Do students need to take Foundations before Advanced? Can it be taken out of sequence?
    • Is it mandated?
    • Comments from Rebecca Mathern –
      • Recommended notation in the catalog
      • Communicate broadly
      • Foundations is encouraged before Advanced but not mandated
    • Are there any objections for a college to require junior status on an Advanced course?
      • No objections

Core Education Director

• Discussion:
  • 5 high priority courses remain to be submitted.
  • 219 high priority courses that need to be approved by March 1.
  • Could sub-committees review categorically, rather than individually by course.
    • Develop and encourage specialization.
    • This is already done to an extent, depending on the flow of the courses.
  • 3 clear claims
  • 8-minute rolling clock for discussion

Course Reviews

• PPOL 201 Intro to Public Policy                                                  Social Science
  • Discussion continuing from last week.
  • A third reviewer was added from last week.
  • The third reviewer had some minor issues with the course but does believe it is a Social Science that it does meet all the Learning Outcomes (LOs) in a similar fashion to other courses in the category.
  • Major revisions have been done to the course and multiple reviewers do see how it meets the LOs.

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. The motion passed with 10 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• ED 105 What School Taught Me About Sex                                  Social Science
  • Does not feel like an introductory course to education or public health.
    • Learning Outcomes, Criteria & Rationale (LOCR) does state that courses should be an introductory course to a general field or subfield of social science.
    • Language in the LOCR does feel somewhat restrictive.
    • This could be a broader issue because there are a lot of classes in the pipeline that are not necessarily intro classes.
  • How does this class and rationale compare then to Human Sexuality?
    • Sexuality Studies
  • There are many courses in the former Baccalaureate Core Social Processes & Institutions (SPI) category that are planning on going into the Social Science category that an interpretation of this criteria as saying it has to be an intro to a larger field will rule out those courses.
  • The approach to LO3 shows that it is not an introductory course.
  • Would not work well for students outside of the major.

Action: Motion to roll back on the basis that it does not meet criterion 4 of the LOCR; seconded. The motion passed with 10 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• H 256 Silence equals death: HIV stigma to global social movement Social Science
  • Overall looks good but may suffer from similar issues as ED 105 – it may not be an introductory course.
    • Heath Henry looked at this course and does believe it is a better fit for the category based on the content.
    • Should it be called Intro to Global Health? Is it okay for a title to be more alluring to students if the course content and description meets the category?
      • The title is not misleading

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. The motion passed with 11 votes in favor, 1 vote in opposition and 1 abstention.

• COMM 321 Introduction to Communication Theory                        Beyond I
  • Previously discussed the personal branding statements and various other issues.
  • All issues appear to have been taken care of in the resubmission.
  • Personal branding statements are key in certain fields.

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. The motion passed with 9 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 2 abstentions.

• GEOG 333 Environmental Justice                                               Difference, Power & Oppression – Advanced
  • No issues.
  • Reasonable pre-requisite.
  • Exemplary course.
  • Always ask before doing campus/community interviews.

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. The motion passed with 12 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• COMM 428 Communication of Cultural Identities                           Difference, Power & Oppression – Advanced
  • The first reviewer had concerns about reaching intersectionality; concerns on each LO, especially missing discussion of systems; and notes that low value exists in reading and quizzes.
  • The other reviewer did not have as many concerns with the course and felt it could just use some more details. Felt the intersectionality was more inferred, even though it wasn’t more explicitly stated.

Action: Motion to rollback and ask how they are addressing intersectionality; seconded. The motion passed with 10 votes in favor, 2 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• FST 265 Halal Food: Cultural and Religious Implications                  Difference, Power & Oppression – Foundations
  • Sent back to ask how they addressed intersectionality.
  • Addressed all concerns and syllabus looks great.

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. The motion passed with 13 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• KIN 212 Sociocultural Dimensions of Physical Activity                    Difference, Power & Oppression – Foundations
  • Sent back with several items to be addressed.
  • Most concerns were addressed but the essential assignments look unchanged.
    • You could complete this assignment and never once address racism which is supposed to be addressed in this LO.

Action: Motion to rollback to show how the essential assignment requires the student reflect on their own position or role within the systems of oppression shown in the documentary/film and how they must analyze racism as a part of that assignment (as it intersects with other forms of oppression, but racism cannot be missing); seconded. The motion passed with 13 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• HSTS 213 Landscapes & Waterscapes in Indigenous North America Difference, Power & Oppression – Foundations
  • Good fit for the category but responses to how course activities meet the LOs are somewhat vague.
  • The essential assignment for one of the LOs is a reflection but the description for it does not seem like a reflection.
  • The co-chairs were not able to follow-up with the liaison comment requesting to meet up with indigenous leaders to discuss the courses.

Action: Motion to send back to 1) add content to syllabus matrix, 2) clarify content for each LO, 3) clarify essential assignment across the three LOs, and 4) co-chairs will follow up on liaison.; seconded. The motion passed with 13 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• GEOG 300 Sustainability for the Common Good                            Seeking Solutions
  • No issues and remains a good fit for the current Baccalaureate Core Contemporary Global Issues category.
  • Exemplary course.

Action: Motion to approve; seconded. The motion passed with 11 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 1 abstentions.

• ANS 315 Contentious Social Issues in Animal Science                    Seeking Solutions
  • Sent back with multiple notes.
  • Some changes were made but should probably be rolled back again to address remaining issues.
  • Still needs some clarification on teamwork and how it is facilitated and assessed.
  • Needs essential assignment on syllabus.

Action: Roll back with requesting more information about assessment of teamwork; seconded. The motion passed with 12 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.

• HST 444 The Nuclear Age                                                         Seeking Solutions
  • To be discussed during the next meeting.

• GEOG 103 The Human Planet                                                    Arts & Humanities – Global
  • Does not meet Humanities LO or Global LO.
  • Open Educational Resources (OERs) are in place, though it does use Tophat. Makes a good argument for using it, though.
  • One reviewer did not believe it was a good fit for the category, but another reviewer disagreed.
  • The second reviewer believes concerns were appropriately addressed in comments. It seems clear that they meet LO 2.
  • The metrics for both modalities were included on each type of syllabi, which might be confusing for students. On-campus students don’t need to see the metrics for hybrid students.
    • Heath agreed that the comments from the originator did help to clear up some of the confusion.
  • The follow-up from the negative liaison – he did believe it could be a good fit for the category, but it was double-bind, and they currently weren’t convinced. It was much too abstractive. Key words and terminology

Action: Motion to approve with comment about the revised course description that no longer follows catalog guidelines; seconded. The motion passed with 10 votes in favor, 1 vote in opposition and 2 abstentions.

• ENG 211 Literatures of the World: Africa                                     Arts & Humanities – Global
  • Feels like a good fit for the category but the lived experience doesn’t seem explicitly stated in the syllabus.
    • It is doing it; the answer just felt a little weak in CIM.
  • One reviewer felt it was an exemplary example of a global arts & humanities course.

Action: Motion to approve; The motion passed with 12 votes in favor, 0 votes in opposition and 0 abstentions.