ASCRC Minutes 2/5/08
Members Present: H. Bruce, I. Crummy, J. Graham, S. Lodmell, J. Luckowski, P.
Silverman, L. Tangedahl, H. Thompson, G. Weix
Members
Absent/Excused:
Ex-Officio Present: M. Hoell, D. Micus, A.
Walker-Andrews
Guest: Len Broberg- EVST Chair, Josh
Slotnick, Associate Dean Tompkins
Chair Thompson called the meeting to order at 2:15 p.m.
The minutes from 1/29/08 were amended and approved after communication from guests.
Communications:
·
Professors Broberg explained the request for the
two courses and the funding of Professor Slotnick’s position. The department
would like to deliver the content to both undergraduate and graduate students.
Business Items:
·
Appeal decision on EVST 460 & 470
After discussion, consensus was reached for EVST to use their existing
seminar course for this purpose. This
will allow the content to be taught and provide flexibility for the program to
utilize community expertise and offer needed diversity for the program. The
department will submit a revised course form for ASCRC to consider as soon as
possible so that the course will be included in next year’s printed catalog.
·
Follow-up materials were received and reviewed
by the Social Science Subcommittee for COM 217 and WGS 463 and they were
approved.
·
The draft policy/procedures/instruction changes
were reviewed by the committee and approved with a slight revision (see
appended). It is unclear whether the
policy should be approved by the Faculty Senate. ECOS will be consulted regarding this
issue. It was suggested that a sample
course form be developed as a guide for departments. Chair Thompson and Camie will work on
revisions to the form that comply with the revised policy and a possible sample
course form.
Administration and Finance has requested that clarification be made regarding course
fees. It would be helpful for programs to be clear about the procedure and
time-line involved with course fee requests.
The Board of Regents only considers these requests every other
year. Camie will obtain the relevant
information from Administration and Finance and consider the appropriate place
for instructions.
·
COT developmental courses
There is a group meeting to discuss ways to make students transition from the
Good and Welfare
There were two course forms approved by the CAS Dean’s Office from Film Studies that did not make it to the Senate Office this fall. It is likely this occurred because the department chair did not realize the department was responsible for assuring the items were submitted to the Senate Office after approval from the dean. Film Studies will likely request that these be considered this spring. It was suggested that there be an orientation for new department chairs with regards to curricular review procedures.
The Ethics Subcommittee of the General Education Committee
is meeting with instructors of Ethics Courses to discuss the perceived
difficulties with the new criteria. It
might be a good idea for all the General Education Subcommittees to meet with
instructors of current perspective courses for dialogue as well.
Professor Weix asked whether there was a policy in place pertaining to the
number of Independent Studies a faculty member can teach. She discovered that one faculty member had 20
independent studies listed in the course schedule. Should ASCRC consider establishing a
guideline or policy?
Another issue has come up with regards to prerequisites and appeals. When is a prerequisite a requirement? There have been several appeals with advisor
error justifications in cases where students have failed Math 100 but passed
Math 117.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:18 p.m.
Revision to “ASCRC
policies”:
Adding New Courses: A department proposes a new course when it wishes to revise the
curriculum and to reflect new areas of study within the discipline. Criteria for evaluating a new course are:
1)
Does
the course fit well with the existing curriculum?
2)
Does the course represent a net increase in
departmental credits? Does the
department explain course deletions, combinations, credit reductions and/or
increased teaching resources that accompany the proposal?
3)
Does
the course have internal coherence and clear focus?
4)
Does
the course duplicate courses in other departments? If so, have conflicts been
resolved?
5) Is the course proposed by a tenured or tenure-track faculty member? If not, does the department chair or director
make the proposal and stipulate that the course will be taught with existing
resources at least once every three years?
6) Has the course been
taught experimentally? An X95 course taught twice must be reviewed and approved
by ASCRC or Graduate Council and the Faculty Senate prior to inclusion in the
catalog.
7) Has the course been
assigned a number that is not already in use or has not been used for the past
10 years? If the course is cross-listed,
does the course have a consistent number across departments?
8) If the course is UG,
has it been assigned a 400 number?
Although
course content should be appropriate to its proposed level, it is not the role
of ASCRC or Graduate Council to judge the instructor's choice of texts, assignments,
or grading methods.
Study Skills/Career
Skills Courses (Approved
by the Faculty Senate October 9, 1997.)
Study
Skills courses: Two credits may be
applied toward the 120-credits required for graduation.
Career
Skills Courses: No credit may be applied
toward the 120-credits required for graduation
Revision to “ASCRC
Procedures”:
Criteria
for Evaluating Curriculum Changes
Purpose:
These
criteria are intended to expedite the curriculum review process. It is hoped
that careful review will be conducted in subcommittees and that ASCRC will
review only those course proposals that a subcommittee has identified as
presenting particular concerns or about which a member of ASCRC or Graduate
Council seeks additional information or discussion.
Adding New Courses: A department proposes a new course when it wishes to revise the
curriculum and to reflect new areas of study within the discipline. Criteria for evaluating a new course are:
1)
Does
the course fit well with the existing curriculum?
2)
Does the course represent a net increase in
departmental credits? Does the
department explain course deletions, combinations, credit reductions and/or
increased teaching resources that accompany the proposal?
3)
Does
the course have internal coherence and clear focus?
4)
Does
the course duplicate courses in other departments? If so, have conflicts been
resolved?
5) Is the course proposed by a tenured or tenure-track faculty member? If not, does the department chair or director
make the proposal and stipulate that the course will be taught with existing
resources at least once every three years?
6) Has the course been
taught experimentally? An X95 course taught twice must be reviewed and approved
by ASCRC or Graduate Council and the Faculty Senate prior to inclusion in the
catalog.
7) Has the course been
assigned a number that is not already in use or has not been used for the past
10 years?
8) If the course is UG,
has it been assigned a 400 number?
Although
course content should be appropriate to its proposed level, it is not the role
of ASCRC or Graduate Council to judge the instructor's choice of texts,
assignments, or grading methods.
Revision to “Instructions for Course Change Form, Curriculum proposals”:
I
II
III
New Course
§
Exact entry should include course abbreviation (e.g.,
SPAN, GEOG), level, number, title, credits, repeatability (if applicable),
frequency of offering, prerequisites, and a brief description.
§
Justification and
curriculum adjustment explains how the course satisfies the criteria for
evaluating a new course. See criteria
for adding a new course at……
§
Graduate increment assigned to graduate students is
specified. Reference graduate increment
guidelines at http://www2.umt.edu/facultysenate/Grad/UG.htm.