Minutes
GES
Friday,
February 08, 2008
10:00 AM
Attending: Margit Codispoti,
Linda Hite, Mark
Masters, John Hrehov,
Brenda Lundy, Jonathan Tankel, Erin Frew (visitor)
Unable to attend: Ali Rassuli, Carlos
Pomalaza-Raez
Discussed area 2 courses for science
majors and how various introductory courses are tagged as General Education for
those majors. This then carries over if
the students switch majors.
Response: It is A&S's
issue. Letter of the Law is that the students need to
take it. But checking is A&S’s problem.
Is this a large issue?
We requested data on variable topic Gen
Ed courses so that we can know how many there are.
Discussion on rubrics for assessment
Margit
provided us with a start for information literacy
"Gather, evaluate, select, organize
and synthesize material in order to complete a research or creative
project"
In order to show that one has gathered,
evaluated, selected and synthesized material one must have done a literature review
to find existing information on the topic of the project. questions
that could show this include:
Is there a bibliography or works cited or
consulted page?
Do the works listed show a diversity and
number of citations that are appropriate to the topic?
Do the sources appear to be credible and
have a reasonable number of primary, secondary and scholarly sources
appropriate to the topic been consulted?
Are the sources identified accurately so
that the source document can be located by others (author, title, journal,
volume, date and page numbers or publisher and date of book or web address for
online source)?
Is the textual use of sources and quotes
documented and are all source materials represented in the works cited page?
The committee
was unsure if a bibliography was always required so will add "where applicable"
The conclusion
was that we were going to look at the following three questions:
Is there a
bibliography when appropriate?
Is there a
multiplicity of credible sources?
Are the
sources correctly identified?
Meeting 2-29-08
_____________________
GES
1-18-08
Friday,
January 18, 2008
9:54 AM
Minutes
Attending: Margit Codispoti,
Linda Hite, Mark
Masters, Ali Rassuli,
John Hrehov, Carlos Pomalaza-Raez,
Brenda Lundy, Erin Frew (visitor)
Unable to attend: Jonathan Tankel,
We discussed that whether a student can
have credit for a Gen Ed Area VI course that is not already an approved area VI
course. We decided that we cannot
approve course.
We discussed the need to have a published
list or our rulings on various issues so that there is some committee
consistency.
We also discussed that there should be
mention in bulletin about testing out of all (with the exception of Area VI)
General Education Courses.
We had discussions about whether we
should use this type of random sampling or to use Systematic Randomization so
that we look at each school or discipline.
We decided to keep sampling as it is.
Further discussed Rubrics
Talked about pt scale & num. of
reviewers
Decided to use a 5 point scale
Discussed types of rubrics Analytic (w/
detailed descriptions in each cell), Holistic has empty cells.
We discussed forms of Analytic rubrics: ones with only max
& min values and no explicit description for each value of points
We have decided: 5 pt analytic rubric.
next meeting Feb 8, @ 10
____________________
GES
12-4-07
Tuesday,
December 04, 2007
1:30 PM
Minutes
Attending: Margit Codispoti,
Linda Hite, Mark
Masters, Jonathan Tankel, Ali Rassuli,
Erin Frew (visitor)
Unable to attend: John Hrehov, Carlos
Pomalaza-Raez, Brenda Lundy
Lessons learned in Area VI document
requests: We need to be earlier in our distribution of the requests and we need
to copy department chairs,
After the distribution of the request
that all General Education Courses include the general education learning
outcomes, the issue came up about whether high school based courses need to
include these as well. After some discussion,
the consensus was that school based courses are not of concern to this issue.
We discussed the issue that some
non-general education courses were getting noted as general education courses
such as CHM 115 which is NOT GE. Linda
will query Patrick and Bill Baden.
Assessment
We talked about the method of
assessment. Ali argued for a 5pt scale:
strongly agree to strongly disagree in answer to a specific question rather
than a descriptive rubric.
There was discussion about assessing all
of the general education outcomes as opposed to a single outcome such as
writing. Consensus was on whole program
assessment.
We discussed whether we should use a 5
point or a 2 point scale in assessment.
_______________________________
Minutes
GES 11-15-07
Thursday, November 15, 2007
9:36 AM
Attending: Linda Hite, Brenda Lundy, Mark Masters,
Jonathan Tankel, Ali Rassuli,
Erin Frew (visitor)
Unable to attend: John Hrehov, Carlos Pomalaza-Raez,
Margit Codispoti
Minutes approved
The General Education
Learning Outcomes are:
General Education
Learning Outcomes
1.
To be
familiar with the important modes of human thought that are the foundations of
science, philosophy, art and social behavior.
1.
To possess
effective foundation skills:
a.
Read, write, and
speak with comprehension, clarity, and precision.
b.
Identify
substantive knowledge and disciplinary methods.
c.Develop
information literacy skills.
d.
Reason
quantitatively (as means of gaining and creating knowledge and drawing reliable
conclusions)
2.
To
demonstrate the ability to think critically and to solve problems using the
foundation skills:
a.
Evaluate their
ideas and the ideas of others based upon disciplined reasoning.
b.
Understand the
traditions that have formed one’s own and other cultures.
c.Be able to
articulate their ideas in appropriate media.
3.
To complete a
research/creative project outside the student’s major discipline that requires
synthesizing knowledge and applying skills gained.
We discussed rubrics for
assessing the learning outcomes. We
talked about how we will set some criteria with a scale. Each statement of the rubric looks at a
single variable.
We discussed possible
assessment procedures:
One goal is to attempt to
have the overall rubric on a single page for the entire program.
Much of the discussion was
about who to involve in the process. The
first position seems to be detail-oriented and involve the responsible
department (such as English) early. The
alternate is we attempt to take a more global approach.
Committee consensus was on
the global approach.
The first general education
"learning outcome" is difficult.
We have to operationalize it to make it more
specific.
Jonathan is developing
initial table of topics
Ali is working on No. 1
Next meeting is Dec. 4 1:30
_______________________
Minutes for the General Education Subcommittee
10-11-07
Attending: Margit Codispoti, Linda Hite, Brenda Lundy, Mark Masters, Jonathan Tankel
Unable to attend: John Hrehov, Carlos Pomalaza-Raez, Ali Rassuli
Actions
Minutes approved
We evaluated course proposals for S425 and S410.
S410 is a variable title course and we cannot approve that as a General Education Course.
S425 needs some revisions.
We found that the General Education Proposal Forms need to be changed to require objectives to be listed on syllabi and to explain how the course meets the General Education Objectives.
We decided that a memo needs to be sent to all faculty before Thanksgiving break for faculty to include the General Education learning objectives on the syllabi of General Education courses.
We discussed assessment and decided that we should collect artifacts this year (to be sent to Erin Frew) and we can develop the Rubrics for a trial run. A memo to all area VI faculty regarding the collection of artifacts will have to be done fairly soon.
Next meeting set
for Thursday November 1 at 1:30
General Education Subcommittee Meeting
9/6/07
Attending: Margit Codispoti, Linda Hite, John Hrehov, Brenda Lundy, Mark Masters, Carlos Pomalaza-Raez, Ali Rassuli
Unable to attend: Jonathan Tankel
Mark Masters was elected chair.
We discussed assessment plans of the general education program.
In particular, the plan developed last year was to collect final project artifacts.
A memo needs to be written and sent to all faculty teaching Area VI courses requesting that they collect the artifacts and forward them to the GES.
We need to
develop the rubrics for analysis of the artifacts.