MENU
 
Faculty Senate



blank


 
fsonline_large
purple
Faculty Officers
Faculty Senate
Faculty Manual
University Standing Committees
Faculty Assembly
Academic Unit Codes of Operation
University Calendars
Issues of Importance for Faculty


EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATE

ACADEMIC, APPELLATE, AND SENATE COMMITTEE

 ANNUAL REPORT

2001-2002 Academic Year

 

COMMITTEE:  University Curriculum

 

 

1.              Membership (include ex-officio members).

 

Dave Batie, Sadie Cox, Steve Estes, Tom Huener, Dale Knickerbocker, Greg Lapicki, Betsy Markowski, Ron Mitchelson, Rita Reaves, Elizabeth Smith, Rick Taylor.

 

2.       Meeting Dates (include members present*).

* and members who contributed to committee action, but were not at the meeting.

 

Aug. 23, Sept. 13 and 27, Oct. 11, Nov. 8, Jan. 10 and 24, Feb. 14 and 28, Mar. 28. All faculty and administrative representatives were present except when excused for a conflict with other univesity business or illness.

 

3.       Subcommittees established during the year (include progress and/or completion of work).

 

§A subcommittee was formed to study the possibility of a web-based course proposal form. The idea to use Adobe was considered and discarded, work has begun on an HTML form with pop-up help windows.

§A subcommittee was formed to consider the possibility of giving informational sessions. Due to these members' commitments on various SACS committees, the project was placed on hold.

 

4.      Accomplishments during the year, especially as addressed through committee goals.  Please include recommendations made to any University agency other than the Faculty Senate that will be noted under #5.

 

1.              Revised submissions process (see "Business Carried Over," 2000-2001). Changed submission deadline to two weeks prior to meeting (1 week before publication of agenda) to allow VCAA liaison time to work with units on preparation, combined UCC 's independent website with Senate-maintained UCC website, rewrote informational materials on web site and added General Education guidelines, made editorial revisions to course proposal form.

2.              Investigated  use of web-based proposal form. A subcommittee was formed to study the possibility of a web-based course proposal form. The idea to use Adobe was considered and discarded, work has begun on an HTML form with pop-up help windows.

3.              A subcommittee was formed to consider the possibility of giving informational sessions. Due to these members' commitments on various SACS committees, the project was placed on hold.

4.              Work to strengthen the relationship between student assessment and curricular review. After revising the course proposal form last year to request information in this area, we have used the submissions review process to educate proposing units in this area. More must be done in this area; it will be our top priority for next year.

 

5.       Reports to the Faculty Senate (include dates and resolution numbers).

 

Sept. 4: actions of Apr. 26. FSR 01-28

Oct. 9: actions of Sep. 13. FSR 01-30

Nov. 13: actions Sep. 27. FSR 01-34

Dec. 4: actions of Oct 11. FSR 01-38

Jan. 29: actions of Nov.8. FSR 02-01

Feb. 26: actions of Jan. 10, 24. FSR 02-06

 Mar. 19: actions of Feb. 14, 28. FSR 02-10

 

6.       Business carried over to next year (list in priority order).

 

1.      Work to strengthen the relationship between student and program assessment and curricular review; possibly in relation to informational workshops or change in instructions on website. This is a long-term, ongoing effort.

2.      Investigate ways to ensure that units affected by course proposals are notified.

3.      Revise submissions process and/or course proposal form to make more user-friendly, clarify process of approval for General Education credit, and elucidate format for electronic submission of catalogue copy. Continue work on HTML version of course proposal.

4.      Create orientation for new members.

 

7.       Evaluation of the committee (include anything that hindered or assisted the

          committee's work during the year).

 

          A.      Charge: adequate

 

          B.      Personnel:  excellent, a hard-working, conscientious group. The committee could benefit from greater participation by student representatives.

 

          C.      Attendance: never a problem.

 

          D.      Responsibilities: adequate

 

          E.      Activities: normal

 

 

8.       Suggestion(s) to the Chair of the Faculty and/or Faculty Senate for improving the

          effectiveness of the committee.

          None

 

 9.      Does the Committee’s organizational meeting next year need to be earlier than the date set this year?    _______ yes    _____X____no 

 

 

                                        Chairperson: Dale Knickerbocker

 

Secretary: Elizabeth Smith