ad hoc committee for drake general education curricular reform preliminary report to faculty senate...
TRANSCRIPT
S
Ad Hoc Committee forDrake General Education
Curricular ReformPreliminary Report to Faculty Senate
Sandy Henry, chairSchool of Journalism and Mass Communication
Committee & Charge
Spring 2014 UCC Report Two alternative models suggested for
consideration
Viability Study
Membership elected or appointed
Final report to Senate Exec in March
Methodology
Review Models and revise as necessary prior to data gathering Must fulfill promise of Drake Curriculum Must fit within credit hour limitations
Education: 6 hours in multiple endorsements
CPHS and CBPA: a few at 24, mostly 27 hours
Met with Dean’s Council and CAAD
Integrated Core Curriculum
retrieved from https://www.pdx.edu/unst/home on February 25th, 2014.
FRINQ =A 2-semester First Year seminar
SINQ =3 interdisciplinary courses within a defined theme
Upper Division Cluster =3 courses related to the SINQ theme, taken any time
Senior Capstone=probably continues to look like our current Senior Capstone
Integrated Core Curriculum =27 hours
Majors/Minors Model
retrieved from http://www.collegeofidaho.edu/academics/peak-guide/peak-map on October 4th, 2014.
Majors/Minors Model
Four areas of study Humanities and Fine Arts Social Sciences and History Natural Science and Mathematics Professional Studies and Enhancements
Students complete 1 major and 3 minors of 12 hours each, each must be in a different area
Majors/Minors Model
Four areas of study Humanities and Fine Arts Social Sciences and History Natural Science and Mathematics Professional Studies and Enhancements
Students complete 1 major and 3 minors, each must be in a different area
Drake Majors/Minors Model
Students complete 1 major and 2 minors
At least 1 minor must be interdisciplinary
Traditional minors do not change
New minors can be developed
Interdisciplinary minors are developed and include the FYS
Methodology
Questions provided via email prior to face-to-face meetings
Gather information from academic and administrative units Quantitative review Must be as objective as possible
Our “Areas of Inquiry”
Human Resources
Capital Resources
Student Impact
Assessment/Outcomes
Justification to
Strategic Plan and Mission
Faculty and Staff Impact
Broader Impacts
Early Results
Preliminary discussion of information General sense of approval for each
model Many questions regarding specifics
“if,” “might,” “could” Common theme: funding
People, Technology, Classrooms Also: outcomes, university identity
Committee Concerns
Leadership transition
Administrative program review
“Mission creep”
New Considerations
Basic operational precepts
Basic understanding of outcomes
History of AOIs
Consider crafting new model
