Intra-campus MEMORANDUM

 

Date:               July 31, 2002

 

To:                  ECOS

 

From:              Academic Standards and Curriculum Review Committee

Audrey Peterson, Chair

 

Re:                  2001-2002 Annual Committee Report

 

2001 – 2002 ASCRC Committee Membership:

                Audrey Peterson, Curriculum and Instruction, Chair

                Don Bedunah/Ed Burke, Forestry

Albert Borgmann, Philosophy

                Jon Graham, Mathematics

                Louis Hayes, Political Science

                Steven Hesla, Music

                Marina Kanevskaya, Foreign Languages and Literatures

                Bruce Bigley/David Moore, English

                Ed Moore, College of Technology

                Christopher Mullin, Mansfield Library

                Thomas Tonev, Mathematics

                Wendy McFadden, Student, Fine Arts and Education

                Betsy Bach, Assistant Provost, Ex Officio

                Philip Bain, Registrar, Ex Officio

                Laura Carlyon, Associate Registrar, Ex Officio

                Melanie Hoell, University College, Ex Officio

                Note:  The committee was short one faculty member all year.  Unsuccessful attempts were made

 to find someone in the Sciences.

 

Agenda Items and Actions:

 

  1. Routine curriculum review:  The bulk of curriculum change requests were presented at the November Faculty Senate meeting, but additional requests were included at subsequent Faculty Senate meetings (see minutes of November, December, March, April and May Senate meetings).  In all, over 260 course and program changes were reviewed.

 

  1. Variations in credit awarded for AP/CLEP programs:  At the request of Admissions, ASCRC reviewed again the University’s policies regarding acceptance of Advanced Placement and/or College Level Examination Program scores.  In an attempt to standardize policies, ASCRC proposed the following to the Senate on October 10:

University credit will be awarded to students presenting test scores that meet or exceed levels recommended by the American Council on Education (ACE) for Advanced Placement Tests (AP) and/or tests from the College Level Examination Program (CLEP) of the College Entrance Examination Board.  The amount of credit awarded will be in accordance with ACE recommendations.  The applicability of any and all AP and CLEP university credits to specific course equivalencies or degree requirements will be left to departmental discretion.

The motion did not pass.  Further action is needed on this matter as the current policy, approved by the Senate at the May 2000 meeting, is that all AP and CLEP courses meeting ACE standards will be accepted unless the department affected can justify reasons otherwise.  The current policy has never been implemented due to departmental resistance. 

 

  1. General Education Outcomes:  The Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges requested that outcomes for general education be in place in time for their revisit in Spring 2002.  The various subcommittees on ASCRC drafted outcomes, and a campus-wide hearing was held on December 6, 2001 for comment.  Written comment was also received.  After considerable follow-up discussion and revision, the outcomes were presented and passed at the February 2002 Faculty Senate meeting.  (See document on the Faculty Senate web site at: http://www.umt.edu/facultysenate/ASCRCx/Adocuments/GE%20outcomes%202-14-02.htm.  )

 

  1. Cultural Studies Requirements:  An outgrowth of discussions surrounding the General Education Outcomes (see #3 above) led to a request from the Department of History and ECOS for ASCRC to revisit the Senate decision of May 2001, which deleted the Western Studies requirement.  ASCRC received about equal input on both sides of the issue.  It quickly became apparent that describing the cultural requirement in terms of a Western/Non-western dichotomy is not helpful—the language and intent are not clear.  The Humanities Subcommittee was charged with reviewing Perspectives 2 and 3 to revisit and clarify the purposes of those perspectives regarding cultural awareness.  Also, given that the Provost has a committee working on a revision of General Education, ASCRC wishes to delay final action until that committee presents its recommendations.

 

  1. Upper Division Writing Proficiency Exam:  At the request of the Provost, ASCRC reviewed the catalog description of the writing requirements in an attempt to clarify sequence and importance.  After considerable discussion with faculty and with the Provost’s Writing Committee, ASCRC responded to the Provost with a list of suggestions for consideration by all parties involved to clarify and communicate the issues surrounding general education writing requirements.

 

  1. Review of General Education Perspectives 1, 2, and 3:  ASCRC has embarked on a systematic review of all general education perspectives to assure that the perspective is accomplishing what we want it to, and that the courses approved for the perspective continue to meet the goals of the perspective.  Perspective 5 was reviewed in 2000-2001; Perspective 1 was slated for this year and syllabi were collected for the review.  When we began to develop general education outcomes, it became clear that the perspective review should go on hold until the outcomes were approved, so that the syllabi could be checked for attention to the outcomes.

 

At the same time, the controversy over the western/non-western requirement generated interest in a review of Perspectives 2 and 3, so that purposes for cultural awareness could be clarified at the perspective level and assessed.  Again, the syllabi were collected.  In both instances, by the time the general education outcomes were approved, the sub-committees had run out of time and were not able to complete the reviews this year. 

  

  1. Endorsement of Policy for Reinstatement of Suspended Students:  At the request of the Enrollment Management Council, ASCRC reviewed and endorsed the revision of policy for reinstatement of suspended students.  The new language was presented to the Faculty Senate in April and was approved, allowing suspended students to use summer semester as their suspended semester.  (See April Faculty Senate Minutes for language.)

 


  1. Endorsement of Plan to Increase Admission Standards:  In March the Admissions Standards Subcommittee of the Enrollment Management Council presented a draft of their plan to increase admission standards in a series of four stages.  They requested that ASCRC draft a memo of endorsement prior to the presentation of the plan to the Faculty Senate; ASCRC did so.

 

  1. Endorsed of Policy for Continuous Enrollment for Transfer Students:  In March the Registrar’s Office presented proposed catalog language in response to the Regents’ recent change in transfer student policy.  After some revision of language the proposal went to the Senate in March and was passed, allowing transfer students to be governed by a UM catalog from the same year they began college at another institution. (See March Faculty Senate Minutes for language.)

 

  1. College of Technology Curriculum Integration:  In the fall, Chair Peterson appointed a task force to review the issues surrounding transferability of College of Technology (COT) course work toward a UM degree.  In March, the task force reported to ASCRC, recommending that courses not carry a T (technical) designation unless requested by the COT.  In addition, the recommended a full review of all existing courses for removal of the T designation when appropriate.  This recommendation went to the Faculty Senate in April and was approved.  (See April Faculty Senate minutes.)

 

Issues Pending:

 

            Agenda items continuing to need attention include:

1.      Review of COT courses for removal of the T designation where appropriate.

2.      Resolution of the AP/CLEP issue for consistency across campus.  Perhaps the Enrollment Management Council would be an appropriate group to address this issue.

3.      Resolution of the cultural awareness requirement prior to the end of the two-year moratorium on general education changes.

4.      Clarification of the writing competency requirements for consistency of enforcement across campus.

5.      Incorporation of a General Education Oversight sub-committee within the ASCRC structure

6.      Review of the courses in the general education perspectives for inclusion of outcomes