General Education Committee Minutes 10/31/05

Members Present: J. Eglin, S. Gaskill, K. Hill, S. Kalm M. McClintock, D. Pletscher K. Shanley G. Smith, R.Welsh, C. Winkler

Members Excused/ Absent: T. Manuel

Ex-Officio Present:  L. Carlyon, A. Walker-Andrews

Chair Winkler called the meeting to order at 1:10 PM.

The minutes from 10/17/05 were approved.

Chair Winkler provided a quick overview of the recent discussions for Professor Kalm. The flow chart represents the expanded vision of general education and includes the preamble themes being carried through departments. This will allow departments some flexibility in building on the foundations of general education within the major. Professor Kalm commented that cultural awareness was missing in the themes. The chart will require fine tuning before it goes forward to ASCRC and the Senate.

The four perspective model was suggested by professor Eglin. It basically adds foreign language, a composition course and specifies a citizenship course in the MUS core. It would be less confusing for students if the number of credits is specific for each requirement rather than have a variable credit. Therefore the perspectives were broken down further to match the MUS core straight across. It was suggested that the technology literacy be specified by the department as a university requirement.

Fine Arts	3			Fine Arts	3
Humanities	3	Arts and Letters	3-6	Humanities	3
History	3	Human and Cultural Heritage	3-6	History	3
Social Sciences	6			Social Science	3
		Citizenship	3	Citizenship	3
Natural Sciences	6	Scientific Literacy	6	Scientific Literacy	6
Cultural Diversity	3	Diversity (western/non-western) within a perspective

Professor Kalm does not support the elimination of the expressive arts perspective. It requires a different way of looking at knowledge. Music for example teaches students to listen and uses a different part of the brain.

Professor Eglin’s main concern is that general education courses be designed specifically for general education. The labels still have to be defined and the review structure has to be strengthened.

Chair Winkler was wondering whether one of the models to go forward should be a core course model based on the assumption that students need to learn a core body of knowledge. This usually involves numerous sections of identical courses.

The committee was reminded that not all of the members need to agree on the models. Dissention can be expressed in amendments or identified disadvantages of the models.

The American Indian Education requirement is still an issue of uncertainty. The University System seems to be waiting for the Board of Regents to define what the requirement will be and they are aware that cost is a factor, especially if the requirement will be a 3 credit course. There are 7 essential understandings that have focused the efforts of educations in K-12. These are appended to the minutes.

The MUS model contains the basics. UM could have additional requirements specified by the department (higher level of math, writing, foreign language, technology, engagement/internship experience) or graduation requirements (UDWPA, life skills seminars). It is more productive to give the Regents what they want within a university defined program then struggle to comply with Regents definitions.

The meeting was adjourned.

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 1

There is great diversity among the 12 tribal Nations of Montana in their languages, cultures, histories and governments. Each Nation has a distinct and unique cultural heritage that contributes to modern Montana.

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 2

There is great diversity among individual American Indians as identity is developed, defined and redefined by many entities, organizations and people. There is a continuum of Indian identity ranging from assimilated to traditional and is unique to each individual. There is no generic American Indian.

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 3

The ideologies of Native traditional beliefs and spirituality persist into modern day life as tribal cultures, traditions and languages are still practiced by many American Indian people and are incorporated into how tribes govern and manage their affairs.

Additionally, each tribe has its own oral history beginning with their origins that are as valid as written histories. These histories pre-date the “discovery” of North America.

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 4

Reservations are land that have been reserved by the tribes for their own use through treaties and was not “given” to them. The principle that land should be acquired from the Indians only through their consent with treaties involved three assumptions:

I. That both parties to treaties were sovereign powers.

II. That Indian tribes had some form of transferable title to the land.

III. That acquisition of Indian lands was solely a government matter not to be left to individual colonists.

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 5

There were many federal policies put into place throughout American history that

have impacted Indian people and shape who they are today. Much of Indian history

can be related through several major federal policy periods.

Examples:

Colonization Period

Treaty Period

Allotment Period

Boarding School Period

Tribal Reorganization

Termination

Self-determination

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 6

History is a story and most often related through the subjective experience of the teller. Histories are being rediscovered and revised. History told from an Indian perspective conflicts with what most of mainstream history tells us.

ESSENTIAL UNDERSTANDING 7

Under the American legal system, Indian tribes have sovereign powers separate and independent from the federal and state governments. However, the extent and breadth of tribal sovereignty is not the same for each tribe.