COMMITTEE: Academic Standards Committee

MEETING DATE:  3 p.m., Monday, October 20, 2003.

PERSON PRESIDING: Jim Decker

REGULAR MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE:  Bailey, Bass, Decker, House, Juska, and Ravi.

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE: Bassman.

OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: Micheal Poteat, IPRE

Agenda item: Michel Poteat presented the suggested changes to the SOIS forms for laboratory and field based courses.

Discussion: There was some discussion on the essentially editorial nature of these changes.

Action Taken: Bailey moved that the Committee recommend these new SOIS forms to the Faculty Senate. The motion passed. (The forms are attached to the minutes except for possibly correcting some typographical errors.)

Agenda item: Michael Poteat suggested that the Committee should consider modifications to the Distance Learning student survey.

Discussion: Discussion centered on the need for this survey, and the fact that the Committee members did not have the experience of teaching these courses.

Action Taken: Bassman moved that the Committee recommend to the Chair of the Faculty Senate to form an appropriate ad-hoc committee of faculty and administrators to design a Distance learning survey. Bailey amended the motion to request that at least one member of the Academic Standards Committee be appointed to the ad-hoc Committee. The amended motion passed.

Agenda item: Discussion of the draft proposal of the GE curriculum prepared by George Bailey.

Discussion: After extended discussion the Committee decided to accept this draft as its working document. It was decided that the Committee would go through this draft and make the necessary corrections. The Committee then proceeded to reword specific language and requirements.

The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m.

Submitted by,

M. S. Ravi.

SOIS	LAB COURSES	FIELD BASED COURSES
1. The instructor has created an atmosphere of helpfulness	1. The lab instructor has created an atmosphere of helpfulness	1. The ECU instructor has created an atmosphere of helpfulness
2. The instructor has informed students about criteria used for grading	2. The lab instructor has informed students about criteria used for grading	2. The ECU instructor has informed students about criteria used for evaluating the field experience including grading
3. The instructor has made the objectives of this course clear	3. The lab instructor has made the objectives of this laboratory course clear	3. The ECU instructor has made the objectives of this course clear
4. The instructor has been well prepared for each class	4. The instructor has been well prepared for each lab session	4. The ECU instructor has been well prepared for each meeting
5. The instructor has shown enthusiasm in teaching this course	5. The instructor has shown enthusiasm in teaching this lab	5. The ECU instructor has shown enthusiasm in supervising this course
6. The instructor’s course evaluation methods (quizzes, exams, papers, etc) have been fair	6. The lab instructor’s course evaluation methods (quizzes, exams, papers, etc) have been fair	6. The ECU instructor’s course evaluation methods (quizzes, exams, papers, etc) have been fair
7. The textbooks used have been appropriate to the course	7. The lab manuals used have been appropriate to the course	7. The textbooks or other reading materials used have been appropriate to the course
8. This class has challenged me to learn course material, concepts, and skills	8. This lab has challenged me to learn course material, concepts, and skills	8. This class has challenged me to acquire skills related to my professional and academic ambitions
9. The instructor’s syllabus has clarified the expectations of the course	9. The instructor’s syllabus has clarified the expectations of the lab	9. The ECU instructor’s syllabus has clarified the expectations of the course
10. The instructor has provided the opportunity to ask questions	10. The lab instructor has provided the opportunity to ask questions	10. The ECU instructor has provided the opportunity to ask questions
11. The assignments, including reading and projects, have contributed to my understanding of the subject	11. The assignments, including reading and lab activities, have contributed to my understanding of the subject	11. The assignments, including reading and projects, have contributed to my understanding of the subject
12. The instructor has been available to students out of class	12. The lab instructor has been available to students out of class	12. The ECU instructor has been available to students
13. The instructor has provided useful feedback when returning tests and assignments	13. The lab instructor has provided useful feedback when returning tests and assignments	13. The ECU instructor has provided useful feedback
14. The instructor has demonstrated respect for me	14. Thelab instructor has demonstrated respect for me	14. The ECU instructor has demonstrated respect for me
15. When applicable, the instructor has provided different points of view toward the subject	15. When applicable, the lab instructor has provided different points of view toward the subject	15. When applicable, the ECU instructor has provided different points of view toward the subject
16. The instructor has tested on the material emphasized	16. The instructor has tested on the material emphasized in the lab	16. The ECU instructor has evaluated me on the material and activities emphasized
17. The content of the course has been	17. The content of the course has been	17. The content of the course has been
18. The amount of work/reading assigned in this course has been	18. The amount of work/reading assigned in this lab has been	18. The amount of work/reading assigned in this course has been
19. Overall, the instructor is effective in teaching this course	19. Overall, the lab instructor is effective in teaching this course	19. Overall, the ECU instructor is effective in teaching this course
	20. Overall, this lab has contributed to the knowledge and skills required by this course	20. Overall, I have received adequate supervision from my ECU instructor in the activities involved in this course