COMMITTEE: Academic Standards Committee (herein after, the Committee)
MEETING DATE: February 16, 2009
PERSON PRESIDING: Linda Wolfe, Chair-ASC
REGULAR MEMBERS PRESENT:
Stacey Altman, Michael Brown, Linda Crane Mitchell, Nancy Spalding, Mark Sprague, Karen Voytecki, and Linda Wolfe
EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT:
George Bailey, Michelle Elbe, Steven Kresch, and Linner Griffin
OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE:
CALLED TO ORDER: 2:03 p.m.
ACTIONS OF MEETING:
Agenda Item: Approval of the minutes from 9/15/08, 10/20/08 and 11/17/08
Discussion: We approved 9/15/08 minutes on10/20/08.
Corrections: Linda Crane Mitchell (was present on 10/20/08)
Action Taken: Minutes approved with corrections
Agenda Item: Discussion with Provost Sheerer re: foundation courses especially those at the 3000 level.
Discussion: M. Sheerer noted Academic Council wanted to reconsider Film Studies course for FC credit; they did not “reject it.” M. Sheerer stated that Academic Council wanted to know what criteria is used by ASC for FC and particularly why 3000 level would be so designated.
G. Bailey gave historical account of development of criteria in general
-Colleges and Schools using 3000/4000 courses to double count with cognates
-Double-majors (double count too)
G. Bailey then responded to questions re: Film Studies Course in particular.
Take back to Council points:
1. Must be an introduction to a basic discipline in…
2. Must show exposure to research method used in that discipline
3. Must show how it relates to general knowledge
M. Sheerer asked who designates Cultural Diversity requirement? G. Bailey noted that Department Chairs decided. Joann Jones kept the list at one time. No one was sure where the list is now. Faculty Senate voted to approve that process.
Action Taken: None
Agenda Item: Discussion of Request for approval of ENGL 3290 for humanities credit. (Distributed Electronically by L. Wolfe 1/30/09)
Discussion: Huang, Su-Ching presented rationale for ENGL 3290 to receive FC-Humanities credit. 2:35-3:15. The Committee asked that ENGL 3290 be brought back for consideration at the next meeting (3/16/09). Some group concern about the specialization issue.
Group comments suggested that if Chancellor and/or “Assessment Process” is going to enforce the goals – there may be
Action Taken: Requested that proposal be brought back after re-working. Committee members volunteered to consult with the English department on the course.
Agenda Item: Discussion of Proposed revisions to ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix C. Section III. Evaluation in reference to the Student Opinion of Instruction Survey. (Distributed Electronically by L.Wolfe 1/30/09)
Discussion: Some Committee members noted that they liked the notion of not using only SOIS scores and/or abusing SOIS in evaluation, but that they were concerned about administrator’s role being affected.
Action taken: Voted (6-4) to approve.
Agenda Item: Proposed response to the request from the Faculty Senate that the ASC respond to 2.8 (but not 2.8.9) of the Strategic Enrollment Management Task Force (SEMTF).
(L. Wolfe noted sending the attachments: 1) Academic Standards Subcommittee response to 2.8 for consideration, 2) the task force report including discussion of section 2.8 and 3) a letter from Wendy Sharer, chair of the Admission and Retention Policies committee (with request that ASC and the ARPC submit a response to the Faculty Senate by March 31, 2009.)
Discussion: L. Wolfe began discussion by asking for comments on 2.8.1, 2.8.2, 2.8.3, 2.8.4, 2.8.5, 2.8.6, 2.8.7, and 2.8.8. S. Kresch made editorial comments in some cases. Discussion of 2.8.7 ensued. Most of discussion was regarding how many times can one take a course for grade-replacement (subcommittee left this issue undecided). Currently, a student can re-take a course as many times as they have grade replacements for.
Action taken: Approved sub-committee’s report (left grade replacement issue as is).
ADJOURNED: 4 p.m.
Respectfully submitted, Stacey Altman