General Education Committee Year-end Report 2005/2006

Membership
John Eglin, History & ASCRC
Garon Smith, Chem
Karen Hill, Applied Arts and Science
Stephen Kalm, Music
Tim Manuel, Accounting and Finance

Daniel Pletscher, Ecosystem & Conservation Sciences

Steven Gaskill, HHP (Chair- spring)

Celia Winkler, Sociology, Chair (Fall)
Louis Hayes, Political Science (spring)

Kate Shanley, NAS

Michael McClintock, Eng

Student members
none

Ex-Officio

Arlene Walker-Andrews, Associate Provost

Laura Carlyon, Associate Registrar

Agenda Items and Actions:

Membership bylaw amendment
Additional members will create balance on the committee between the College of Arts and Science faculty and professional schools faculty. The majority of general education courses are taught in CAS. The next highest offering of general education courses is from the College of Technology and then the School of Fine Arts. In tradition of the senate representation should reflect the distribution of faculty among the voting groups. There are still more faculty in the College of Arts and Science than the Professional Schools.

Chair (selected by the committee)

Faculty (10 – three year terms)
Faculty ASCRC member (at least 1)

College of Arts and Science (total of 5*)
Humanities (at least 1)
Natural & Physical Science (at least 1)
Social & Behavioral Sciences (at least 1)

*Preference shall be given to a faculty member knowledgeable about Indian Education for All.

Professional Schools (total of 5)
School of Fine Arts (1)
College of Technology (1)
(3 chosen from remaining schools)
College of Forestry and Conservation
College of Health Professions & Biomedical Sci
School of Business
School of Education
School of Journalism
Mansfield Library

Students (2)
Appointed by ASUM for one year

Ex Officio, non voting members
Associate Registrar
Associate Provost

Review of Foreign Languages/Symbolic Systems
There are approximately ten departments that prescribe that students meet the proficiency requirement by taking a foreign language. There are 23 departments that prescribe a symbolic systems sequence and 11 that do not specify how students satisfy the requirement. An alternative model could feasibly move this requirement to departmental specified, and thus reducing the number of credits in the general education program to be more in line with the MUS core.

Advantages and Disadvantages
The advantages and disadvantages of the current general education program, the MUS core, and the General Education Taskforce’s model were explored. The committee explored whether the current, MUS, or Taskforce model met the goals outlined in the Preamble and whether the deficiencies could be addressed through the definitions of the perspectives (reinforcement of the foundational nature of general education courses).

Meeting with Chair of Modern and Classical Languages and Literature
The committee met with Linda Gillison, MCLL Chair to discuss the feasibility and configuration of a campus-wide foreign language requirement. If the goal is to teach students about the language and the culture rather than fluency, a different structure might be sufficient. These courses could use the inductive approach rather than the grammatical approach. A survey would need to be conducted to find out how many students were taking the courses for general education or pursuing language for other purposes. Currently the department can service 660 students if all beginning language courses were full. It would need to be able to service 1500 to meet a requirement. This would involve lots of lower-division teaching, which is not always popular with the faculty.

General Education Flow Chart – provided to ASCRC on 11/18/06 (appended)
This is a diagram that schematically describes the initial recommendations of the General Education Committee on reforming UM’s general education requirements.

The committee determined that it needed to rethink “general education” from the ground up, beginning with the Preamble approved last spring by the Faculty Senate (appended).  General education should be seen less as a “pesky” requirement, something for students to muddle through, and more as something that unifies the entire curriculum. 

The box in the center of the diagram lists essential themes of the University’s education, as described in the Preamble.  These themes are intended to be carried through the curriculum, not only in specific general education courses, but also in other curricular offerings.

The top left oval lists the elements which we believe are essential in what we call the “foundation” courses (what we currently call ‘general education’).  Again, note that there are no specific requirements listed.  The GEC will work on these after we receive ASCRC comments on the diagram.

The top right oval lays out implementation elements.  We see this as an aspect of the Senate’s work that has not received adequate attention and appreciation.  The success or failure of General Education depends on the ability of the faculty to assist each other in the development, implementation and integrity of the foundation courses consistent with the basic criteria described in the top left oval.

The bottom right oval describes the responsibilities of the departments and schools in general education.  We suggest that we can give greater responsibility to the departments in deciding what aspects of general education are most important to their students.  For example, we already cede much of the upper division writing course responsibility to the departments.  We can do the same with Symbolic Systems/Foreign Language, in that most departments already make some sort of recommendation or requirement for their students.

The element of “Global Perspective” in the bottom right oval is to account for the elimination of the diversity perspective anticipated by the MUS core to satisfy the “Indian Education for All” requirement.  This changes the nature of the “western/non-western” distinction.  Instead, we are suggesting that we have a global studies requirement that can be met in a variety of ways, including a departmental determination. 

The bottom left oval carries through the suggestion that “general education” does not stop when the requirements are met, but continue in the form of on-line offerings, public lectures, concerts, and other special events.

Three alternative models for general education - provided to ASCRC on 3/7/06
The committee divided into subgroups to work on alternative models for general education that addressed an element(s) that is contained in the preamble but is lacking from the current program.

Modified Model
Workgroup members: Dan Pletscher, Louis Hayes, Garon Smith

The Modified General Education Model incorporates a few significant refinements to the existing curriculum while, at the same time, requiring minimal disruption of the extant programmatic infrastructure. The three most substantive modifications are:

1) Movement of the Foreign Language/Symbolic Systems competency into a “Department Specified” category so that the faculty within a department can shape which courses and to what extent competency in this area impacts their disciplinary majors;

2) Addition of a second “Department” specified competency area, namely, Information/Technology Literacy. Again, each department can advise students regarding the extent and courses that are most meaningful or most marketable for their graduates;

3) Addition of a 7^th Perspective in Ecology to represent a major ideological viewpoint that is important to the “UM experience”. Many students (as well as faculty) choose Missoula as a study locus because they are attracted to the surrounding natural splendor. More importantly, our future depends on sustaining our ecosystems!

4) Another added component is the requirement of US history or institutions in either perspective 3, 4, or 5. This is to address statements in the mission and preamble regarding civic awareness in a democratic society.

We suggest renaming the Perspective on “Ethical and Human Values” as ”Values, Ethics and Beliefs”. We feel this more broadly reflects the content area of courses likely to fulfill this requirement. (We removed the descriptor “Human” from the title for the obvious reason that it’s somewhat presumptuous to imagine value systems outside our own species!) If this Modified Model is adopted, new language will be necessary on this perspective to include the dimensions of “Values” and “Beliefs” as well as ethics.

New language will also be required for the renaming of the non-western requirement to cultural diversity and the added component of US history or institutions.

Competencies
English Writing Skills	6
Math Literacy	3
Perspectives
1. Expressive Arts ^1.	3
2. Literature & Humanities ^1.	3
3. Historical & Cultural Studies ^1.2.	3
4. Social Sciences ^1. 2.	3
5. Human Values (Ethics, Beliefs & Religion) ^1.2.	3
6. Natural Science 7. Ecology	3 3
^1.Students must take a course meeting the cultural diversity criteria within a perspective.(3) ^2.Students must take a course in US history or institutions within perspectives 3, 4 or 5. (3)
Total credits	30
Department specified:
Information/Technology Literacy
Foreign Language or Symbolic Systems

Citizenship Model
Workgroup members: Tim Manuel, John Eglin, Mike McClintock

Citizenship is to be a member of a society. According to the General Education Preamble, an educated individual is one who is actively engaged in their community. The concept of citizenship shall be emphasized in each course approved for general education credit. Courses submitted for acceptance as a General Education course must demonstrate how the course improves or will assist an individual in becoming an informed, literate, engaged citizen of their local, national and global communities.

Competencies
English Composition (two courses)	6 credits
Mathematics	3
Total Competencies	9
Perspectives
Creative and Performing Arts	3 credits
Literary and Philosophical Studies	3
Historical Studies	3
Social Sciences	3
Citizenship Studies	3
Biological and Physical Science	6
Total Perspectives	21
Total Credits	30
Diversity (western/non-western)	3 credits
May be met by a Perspective Class
Department Specified
Upper Division Writing
Foreign Language/ Symbolic Systems/Information Technology

Changes to the Gen Ed Process proposed by the Citizenship Workgroup:

A permanent subgroup of faculty will be created from different departments designated as General Education Faculty. This faculty will serve as a standing committee of permanent members that will evaluate a course for inclusion as General Education according to the documentation to be developed.

a. This group of faculty will be nominated by their departments and will include representation of the various departments including the professional programs.

b. The Gen Ed faculty will immediately begin reviewing all existing Gen Ed courses to ensure that each meets the criteria for Gen Ed (as revised). Courses that are not deemed to meet the given criteria will have the Gen Ed designation removed.

c. The Gen Ed faculty will periodically update the documentation required for inclusion to General Education. This committee shall also disseminate documentation delineating the criteria used to decide whether a course meets the Gen Ed designation. The Gen Ed faculty may solicit the creation of specific Gen Ed courses of individual departments. The Gen Ed faculty may also solicit the administration for additional resources to meet a specified deficiency in General Education identified through assessment.

d. The Gen Ed faculty will begin developing direct and indirect methods of assessment of the Gen Ed program at the University of Montana. Faculty of the affected departments shall agree to cooperate with utilization of assessment measures and assessment workload if they teach Gen Ed courses.

The Gen Ed faculty will solicit and review reports from all departments indicating how departmental coursework draws upon the skills, knowledge and perspectives taught in the Gen Ed courses.

Montana Cultural Model

Workgroup members: Steven Gaskill, Steve Kalm, Karen Hill, Kate Shanley

This model is designed to complement the overall vision of General Education Themes carried throughout the curriculum (Flowchart). We believe that the uniqueness of Montana should be incorporated, whenever possible, into the curriculum. Ideas include: Active involvement in Montana communities and government, participation in Montana cultural activities, participation in Montana outdoors, involvement with and at least introduction to Native American tribes, individuals and culture and Montana History.

The name of this model reflects that the transferable core has includes qualities unique to The University of Montana-Missoula and the State of Montana including our culture, environment, Native American influences and the strength of our international/global ties.

Montana Cultural Model		NOTES
Transferable Core	Cr	Department specified:
Writing	6	In addition to the two writing courses, students must take: 1) another course that is designated as intermediate writing course. 2) pass the writing competency exam. 2) another course that is designated as an upper division writing course within their department.
Mathematics	3	Information/Technology Literacy is determined individually by each department as necessary for a major.
Moved out of General Education and into Departmental Determination		Symbolic System / Foreign Language is determined individually by each department as necessary for a major.
		Global content is determined individually by each department as necessary for a major, but at a minimum, one course should include an international or global perspective.
Expressive Arts	3	Engaging, Participative and Interactive Teaching and Learning is encourage for a number of classes in each major. It is recommended that classes that include these components be noted in the course list.
Humanities, Literature and Fine Arts	3	Connections between courses are possible under this model.
History	3
Social and Health Sciences	6
Moved out of General Education and into Departmental Determination		It is required that each department assigns a required course on ethical values and human values.
Natural Science	6	One class out of either the natural sciences or Social and Health Sciences must include a laboratory section.
Indian Education for All (IEA)  Including the 8 essential understandings	3
TOTAL	33