COMMITTEE:          Writing Across the Curriculum
 
Meeting DATE:       April 27, 1995.
 
PERSON PRESIDING:   Nancy Zeller, Chair
 
ACTIONS OF MEETING:
Description of action: Minutes Approved
 
Description of action: WAC Director's Report A Seminar/Panel
discussion was held 4/3/95 from 2-4 p.m., in the Great Room at
Mendenhall. It was very successful.
 
E-mail update. Referred to Prof. Gordon. An account has been set
up: WAC-L. It is an unarchived account.
 
Prof. Reaves discussed her summer adventures for the WAC program:
     Publish a handbook of successful WAC courses.
     Write faculty development grants.
 
Dr. Ayers has not yet responded to the editorial language change
of the committee 2/23/95.
 
General thanks to the members of the committee for their efforts
this year were extended.
 
Description of action: Discussion of POLS 4000.
Note. This course was brought to the committee 2/23 and was not
approved. A memo from the instructor was circulated. However,
further discussion was postponed until Prof: Reaves could be
consulted.
 
Discussion: The committee still questioned the amount of writing
in the course. It did not question the quality of the
assignments, or the manner those assignments were graded. The
requirements of a Model One course are not met in the current
proposal. Proposal was not approved, unanimously.
(Hughes/Wittman)
 
Prof. Reaves reminded the committee that even though the
committee had not seen a course proposal until this spring, due
to an oversight, the course is currently being offered as WI.
Because of this, several members of the committee voiced their
concern that the students currently enrolled in POLS 4000 would
not be able to receive credit for this course as Wl. Prof. Reaves
assured the committee that this would not be a problem and the
oversight would be looked into further.
 
Description of action: Discussion of RCLS 4990.
Discussion: Prof. Reaves clarified the questions by the
committee. Course was approved.
 
Description of action: Discussion of EXSS 3906.
Course approval was tabled until the committee could review the
proposal in more detail.
 
Description of action: Brainstorming for WAC improvements,
changes, etc. A blank for the number of credit hours a course
would be offered needs to be added to the proposal form.
 
The question of policing approved Wl courses was brought up for
discussion. Several items were discussed.
1. Possibility for a program of student assessment. A portfolio
approach is used in other universities.
 
2. A new question on the Student Opinion Survey could be added to
indicate the "Writing Intensiveness" of particular courses.
 
3. Have chairs "sign-off" that WI courses in their departments
are being taught in that manner. The most obvious issue with this
method would be that of academic freedom. The issue would be a
good one for further discussion.
 
4. There is a built-in check in the accreditation process in most
professional school and departments.
 
5. In effect, have an expiration date on courses labeled Wl. This
would force the resubmission of course proposals perhaps every 3
years. But, the question still arises: "Is the course being
taught according to the syllabus submitted for approval."
However, it was the feeling of the committee that courses should
be submitted for re-approval if the requirement model changes.
 
The seminar idea was a good one and pretty successful.
Perhaps a seminar could be set up for early in the year to
involve new faculty and involve the chairs as well.  A memo sent
to the chairs identifying the WI courses and the faculty who are
teaching those courses could be sent out to get a prospective
invitation list started.