аЯрЁБс>ўџ 35ўџџџ2џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС#` №П™bjbj\.\. .&>D>D™џџџџџџЄЈЈЈЈЈЈЈМ        Ќ Мб2д д д д д д д д PRRRRRR$hkЄvЈч д д ч ч vЈЈд д ‹ ч Јд Јд P ч P Vи@ЈЈ0д Ш  х.]Щ  ч " PЁ0б$  0Ј0 д ’f h Ю T" Хд д д vv д д д бч ч ч ч МММф  МММ  МММЈЈЈЈЈЈџџџџ General Education Minutes October 19, 2004 Present: Ken Alexander, Don Kaiper, Richard Livingston, Cindy McGrath, Gil Rodriguez, Myra Snell, Nancy Ybarra Approve agenda: additions, deletions, revisions Agenda was approved without changes. Approve minutes of October 5 meeting Minutes approved without changes. GE Course Outlines and Addendum Review outlines as needed: No GE course outlines for review Review current status of speaking component in on-line courses: none We discussed the upcoming report we need to make to the Curriculum Committee on the speaking component in fully on-line courses. Richard reminded us that the articulation does not distinguish between traditional and on-line modes of instruction. The same COOR applies regardless of the mode of delivery. Currently, the GE Committee requires that courses submitted for the L designation include a speech or presentation that is graded. The burden of proof is on the author to provide evidence within the COOR that this requirement is met. We agreed to apply this same standard to on-line courses. In fully on-line courses the author will need to explain how students will fulfill the speech requirement. For example, a student could make a presentation to a community group that is evaluated in a structured manner by an agreed upon community designee. We agreed to provide the Curriculum Committee with pertinent excerpts from the GE Committee minutes of 9/21 and 10/05. We also discussed the issue of compliance. Is there a way to ensure that the speech component is actually met when the course is taught? The college does not attempt to monitor the speech requirement in the traditional setting, so we can’t expect a different standard in the on-line setting. We brainstormed ways in which GE instructors could be reminded of the GE criteria in general, and the speech requirement in particular: periodic flex activity for GE instructors to discuss GE criteria; Office of Instruction memo to GE instructors asking them to include GE criteria in their syllabi, akin to the DSPS accommodation reminder at the beginning of each semester (Richard will work on this); a template memo, provided by O of I to department chairs, with information about the GE criteria that could be adapted to each discipline Update on Critical Thinking Teaching Communities Pilot A: A holistic scoring of the critical thinking essays is scheduled for January flex (1/12/05). We anticipate student work from seven sections of Ethnic Studies/Multicultural courses. After the scoring, next steps for this pilot might include a discussion of other class activities that teach “cause and effect” or perhaps a broader look at critical thinking skills. We plan to collect student work for this “box” again in Fall 2005. Pilot B: Second meeting is scheduled for October 25th. Goal of this meeting is to write a template assignment by drawing on elements common to the critical thinking assignments submitted by instructors. Pilot C: We hope to light the Social Science “box” for a Teaching Community to begin in SP 05 by building on the work Don has done with his department this semester. Pilot D: In preliminary mutterings with Mitch, Nancy sees potential for lighting the Physical and Biological Science “box” for a Teaching Community to begin in FA 05. Review Drafts of Assessment Criteria for Program Level SLOs Interdisciplinary / Ken and Myra: The group liked Ken’s problem-solving focus for rewriting the Interdisciplinary outcome. Myra and Ken will meld Ken’s work into the standard format used for the other GE outcomes. If the result appears to represent substantive changes, we will discuss at a later meeting how to route these suggestions to the Academic Senate, etc. for consideration. Ethics / Richard and Gil: We liked the assessment criteria written by Richard and Gil with the following revision to (a) identify the existence of an ethical issue the ethical implications of issues within a particular discipline. Diversity and Global Perspective / Cindy and Don: The proposed assessment criteria for this outcome generated a lot of discussion. In the end we decided that the intent of this outcome was related to the affective domain --- attitudes, behaviors, and values rather than knowledge and abilities. Cindy and Don agreed to rewrite the assessment criteria from an affective perspective. Nancy provided a useful verb list. Review drafts of new language for Program Level Student Learning Outcomes Postponed for a future meeting. Future Agenda Items: Review new drafts of assessment criteria for the Interdisciplinary and Social Diversity/Global Perspective outcomes. Review drafts of new language for GE Program Level SLOs Discuss how GE outcomes not included in the Big Five will be assessed, e.g. content-based outcomes, Quantitative Literacy. Discuss what happens when we are done with converting current criteria to outcomes and assessment criteria. Who approves these changes? Curriculum Committee? Academic Senate? ,›œЊѓ < \ ѓ$љ56GИО:[\w РBŒ­Т™њіњяіяіяіяіъіяіяіяіхіріяіяіяі h+36 h+37 h+3H* h+35>*h+3 h+35+,›œЬЭђѓ  ; < \ ] š п р Ќ Y›dюя№ёњњњњјјјјјјјјјјјјјјјјјѓѓѓэээ„ ^„  & F$a$™ўёђѓ$%мнЈЉPQјљ56ЗИŸ ABŒЌ­Т7oъљљїёёёёёёёёїїљёёёёёљїїїїььь & F„h^„h„ ^„ ъ™њ & F,1hАа/ Ар=!А"А# $„%ААаАа а†œ@@ёџ@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DAђџЁD Default Paragraph FontVi@ѓџГV  Table Normal :V і4ж4ж laі (k@єџС(No List ™&џџџџ+,›œЬЭђѓ;<\]šпрЌY›dюя№ёђѓ$ % м н Ј Љ P Q ј љ 5 6 ЗИŸ ABŒЌ­Т7oъ›hŽ0hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€hŽ0€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€˜ 0€€™ёъ™™џџ ‘nЦєWL ’nЦœ“nЦ$є”nЦ,E•nЦ