Intra-Campus Memorandum
University of Montana
DATE: April 26, 2001
TO: ECOS
FROM: ASCRC, David Opitz, Chair
RE: 2000-2001 ASCRC Report of Activities
Much of ASCRC’s fall agenda is taken by program and course change proposals for the next University Catalog. ASCRC Subcommittees and the full committee reviewed over 350 proposals during the Fall Semester. See the November and December Faculty Senate minutes for a list of the course proposals that were reviewed and accepted.
One of the agenda items remaining from last year was the task of re-evaluating the Perspective 5 (Ethics) General Education requirement. The charge was to assess the current criteria, propose revised criteria based on this assessment, and finalize the outcomes for Perspective 5. This effort was met with much debate and passion from diverse points of view. The matter was hotly contested in ASCRC, both on the subcommittee and general committee level. ASCRC broadcast the proposed changes to the October Faculty Senate, revised its submission based on feedback, then proposed a modified version to the November Faculty Senate. This version was further modified by the Senate and passed in November.
Once the Perspective 5 criteria were set by the Faculty Senate in November, ASCRC required all Perspective 5 courses be re-approved. Over the course of about a year, ASCRC repeatedly asked for revised syllabi. These courses were reviewed and placed into one of two catetories: Core and Specialized.
It came to the attention of ASCRC (from various sources) that the requirement to take a Western course from Perspective 3 needed to be reviewed. Upon review, ASCRC found little reason why a Western course must be taken from Perspective 3. During this investigation, it came to the attention of ASCRC that the Western designation came about because they were not Non-Western courses. That is, courses became Western courses simply by default. In addition, all courses do not logically fall into the category of either Western or Non-Western (some are neither). Further, Western Civilization is a requirement for admission for all students. The motion to drop the Western requirement was passed in the April meeting of the Faculty Senate and made retroactive.
Many advisors complained how hard it was to understand the requirements for General Education for each catalog – partially due to the fact that many later changes become retroactive. In addition, ASCRC believes it is time to review the entire General Education requirement at the University. For these reasons, ASCRC has placed a 2-year moratorium on General Education changes. The hope is that after General Education is thoroughly reviewed, changes will be fairly rare.
ASCRC was asked to again define the difference between B.A. and B.S. courses. We agreed with ASCRC’s statement of two years ago. The traditional B.A. typically includes a foreign language requirement, and a B.S. should include a significant component of required courses in the pure sciences. We feel strongly that when a department offers both of these degrees, the requirements for the two degrees should be different and that the B.S. degree should reflect "more science."
Many across campus believe there should be an Information Technology (IT) proficiency requirement. ASCRC has endorsed the notion, and is aiding the Provost in forming an IT subcommittee that will investigate and address this issue. The subcommittee is tasked to develop the requirements for an IT proficiency requirement as well as propose an implementation strategy for executing this requirement.
Many people complained about confusing nature of the course and program proposal forms. ASCRC, in conjunction with the graduate counsel, reviewed these forms, and with suggestions from the University as a whole came up with revisions.
Earlier this semester, ECOS tasked ASCRC to act as a clearing-house for information regarding the impact of larger class sizes and other scheduling difficulties for spring term. ASCRC chair David Opitz heard from many voices around campus. ASCRC then summarized the information and provided four potential areas of concern. The ASCRC summary statement was endorsed by the Faculty Senate in April.
Partially due to the turmoil of a budget crisis, activity for course change proposals in the Spring Semester increased over previous years. ASCRC Subcommittees and the full committee reviewed over 40 proposals during the Spring Semester. See the April minutes of the Faculty Senate for a list of the course proposals that were reviewed and accepted.
For the purposes of assessment, it is important that the General Education requirements be re-written in outcomes based language. ASCRC rewrote and approved outcomes based language for Perspectives 3. ASCRC will continue on the other perspectives in Fall 2001. These changes must be presented to the Faculty Senate for discussion and approval in Fall 2001.
The College of Technology feels overly restricted by the current T designations. ASCRC has moved to address this issue starting Fall 2001.