аЯрЁБс>ўџ .0ўџџџ-џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС#` №ПДbjbj\.\. . >D>DДџџџџџџЄЌЌЌЌЌЌЌР     РD24 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 УХХХХХХ$vhоИщЌЙ 4 4 Й Й щЌЌ4 4 ў Й Ќ4 Ќ4 У Й У :c,ЌЌЃ4 ( "PpYЩ Й R У0D™ – –Ѓ–ЌЃ 4 М№ † v lт з4 4 4 щщ 4 4 4 DЙ Й Й Й РРРDРРРРРРЌЌЌЌЌЌџџџџ General Education Committee Minutes of May 11, 2006 Present: Cindy McGrath, Ken Alexander, Myra Snell, Richard Livingston, Gil Rodriguez, Nancy Ybarra Agenda approved. Minutes approved. Music 10 outline approved and will be reviewed by Curriculum Committee on May 17. We agreed to invite Kyle Cheong Chuah to work with Coach Snell or Ybarra to “polish” the COOR in order for it to posted on the Curriculum Committee website as a model for the Music Department. In particular, the assessment criteria need additional clarification. Fall 2006: Cindy will continue as chair of the committee – thank you Cindy-- and we will meet on the 2nd Thursday of each month. Membership: We will continue to seek out new members with the goal of getting a representative from each of the “boxes”. Myra suggested sending an email to department chairs, asking them to appoint someone from their department, if that department teaches a substantial number of GE courses. Nancy mentioned that she and Myra will make a presentation to Academic Senate at the beginning of the Fall semester. This presentation will focus on the TLP proposal to institutionalize degree level assessment by making it an explicit charge for committees like GE. At that point, we can also request that Senate ensure representation from each of the “boxes”. TLP and Teaching Communities: Nancy updated the committee on the status of assessment work being done in Ethnic/Multicultural Studies and Social Sciences. Myra asked the GE Committee to consider bigger questions of what is our ultimate goal, and how will we know when we have achieved it? In general, we agreed that our ultimate goal is the revitalization of the general education program; while it exists in course outlines of record, many faculty are still unaware of the five criteria, or that they need to infuse them in their instruction. Even faculty who are aware and willing may lack strategies for successful infusion.We then brainstormed some ways we might improve on this situation. In the end we decided: Ken will write a blurb to be inserted in first day handouts of GE courses. It will explain what a general education course is, and what students can expect to learn in a general education course in addition to the content of that discipline. Richard will send this out to GE faculty requesting that they include the blurb in their first day handouts for Fall 06. ( I assume that this would be in addition to the usual memo reminding GE faculty of the 5 criteria, now program level outcomes for the GE program with accompanying assessment criteria.) In Fall 06, the GE committee will review first day handouts of GE courses to see how many courses included the blurb or some other specific mention of GE. Ken also offered to make 5 minute presentations in GE courses during the first week of school, if the instructor approved. These presentations would include the same information as the blurb. He could do this in 4-5 classes as a pilot. We also discussed doing a flex workshop for part time faculty on teaching general education courses - we did not explicitly state when this would happen. Editorial Comment from Nancy Notetaker: I think we need to put Myra’s “big questions” back on the agenda for the Fall. If we are successful in revitalizing GE, what will that look like? What are our measures for success? Honors and Assssment Update: Cindy reported that the Honors subcommittee is still working on developing course level SLOs for honor courses and program level goals, and determining the relationship between the two. Back burner issues remain on the back burner: Beyond integrated GE criteria: How will GE outcomes not included in the Big Five be assessed? For example, quantitative literacy. 6‚ „ Дњіёі h*{ИH*h*{И h*{И567š›œ­ЎРС  ž Ÿ - . ќ§"#ОПЌ­IJ'њњњјњњѓјѓјѓјѓјѓјѓјюшюшюјюјю„h^„h & F & F$a$Дў'(БВГД§ј§ј§ђђ„h^„h & F,1hАа/ Ар=!А"А# $ %ААаАа а†œD@ёџD NormalCJ^J_HaJmH sH tH DAђџЁD Default Paragraph FontVi@ѓџГV  Table Normal :V і4ж4ж laі (k@єџС(No List Д џџџџ67š›œ­ЎРСžŸ-.ќ§" # О П Ќ ­ I J ' ( БВГЖ˜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€€˜ 0€€˜0€€˜ 0€€˜0€€˜ 0€€˜0€€˜0€€˜0€€67š›œ­ЎРСžŸ-Ж˜0€€и€˜0€€€˜0€€€˜0€€€˜0€€€˜0€€€˜ 0€€€˜0€€€˜ 0€€€˜0€€€˜ 0€€€˜0€€€˜ 0€€€˜0€€€˜ 0€€€hŽ0јœД 'Д Дџџ Р^\@aР^ЌќeР^М^iР^,В_Р^МbdР^t^dР^idР^