Notes from Joint meeting with ASCRC/ ECOS/ OCHE 2/12/08

Members Present: J. Blunt, I. Crummy, J. Graham, E. Henderson S. Lodmell, J. Luckowski, K. Nalty, L. Tangedahl, H. Thompson, G. Weix

Members Absent/Excused: P. Muench M. Nielsen P. Silverman

Ex-Officio Present: M. Hoell, D. Micus, A. Walker-Andrews

ECOS Guest: J. Carter, L. Hayes, L. Knott, S. McCain
Campus Guests: D. Dalenberg, A. Szalda-Petree, Associate Dean Tompkins, Lou Laasko – Admissions Evaluator

OCHE Guests: Sheila Stearns- Commissioner of Higher Education, Bill MacGregor- Director of Transferability, Roger Barber- Deputy Commissioner: Academic and Student Affairs, Tylor Trevor- Associate Commissioner for Research, Technology & Communication, and Regents Lynn Hamilton and Clay Christian

Communications:

Commissioner Sterns gave a brief history of the events leading up to the common course numbering initiative. The legislature would like the Montana University System to work as a true system in which parts work together. The 2007 Legislature appropriated $1.5 million to the MUS to “fix” the transferability problem. A common course numbering system will meet the expectations of the legislature, the Governor’s Office and the public. It will show a system-wide effort that will produce tangible results and will make transferability of courses transparent to students. Common course numbering systems have been adopted by 11 out of 15 WICHE states. Provost Engstrom experienced implementing a common course numbering system (a 7 year process) in his previous post at the University of South Dakota. Approximately ¼ of the courses were converted to common course numbers/titles. The Board of Regents adopted policy 301.5.5 Equivalent Course Identification and Numbering at its November meeting.

Courses that are significantly similar based on content and breadth, will receive identical prefix, course number, and title. The goal is to produce an unduplicated list of undergraduate courses offered in the MUS. All courses identified as similar will transfer on a one-to-one basis. Faculty Councils or discipline committees will decide which courses are significantly similar. The Councils will review course content, breadth, and expected outcomes. How professors meet course outcomes is still flexible (academic freedom). Faculty Councils for Writing, Math, Accounting, and Anatomy & Physiology met November 9^th 2007. Faculty Councils for Chemistry, Psychology, Economics, and Philosophy met January 25^th 2008. The following meetings are scheduled:

March 3: History, Biology, Political Science, Modern & Classical Languages

April 14: Literature, Computer Science / IT, Sociology, Geosciences

An online discussion board has been created for faculty to provide input for the Councils (www.mus.edu/transfer/councils/index.asp). A preliminary design for a transfer web portal is being tested. The MUS data warehouse is providing current, valid course lists for the council’s work. It is essential that the University have representatives participate in the Councils. Accounting faculty from UM and MSU did not attend the first meeting. The representatives from the 2-year campuses developed outcomes based mostly on performance. This did not meet with approval from the 4-year campus representatives whose programs are accredited. Outcomes for these programs require a critical judgment component. Accreditation concerns should be considered early in the discussion.

The Commissioner’s Office must show results otherwise confidence in the system will be at risk. Common course numbers, titles, and outcomes should be established for 22 disciplines by September 8^th. OCHE has also hired data people to connect the outcomes with K-12. The various institutions need to work together to accommodate students. After initial implementation a management system will need to be set up to review new courses as they are proposed.

Concerns were expressed about changing the organizational structure of program courses. The 200-300 course differential is a complex issue. There will continue to be equivalent crosswalks in these situations. It was questioned whether there would be a number shortage. Dr. MacGregor is working on a four digit numbering scheme.

Unique courses will still have to transfer. Consideration of these will be the next step. Professional Schools should be able to maintain their uniqueness as long as course equivalences are identified. Advising is a critical component to resolving the perception problem. Answers to course transfer questions should be easy to find and transparent for students.

The future of distance education could involve students sampling courses from many campuses to create a degree. Current policies do not support this model. These will have to be reviewed.