WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC COORDINATING COMMISSION MINUTES

Regular Meeting

November 16, 2004

Chair Tom Downing called the meeting of the Academic Coordinating Commission to order on November 16, 2004 in OM340 at 4:02 p.m.   There were sixteen (16) members present, the Registrar (1), recorder (1), and three (3) guests, for a total of twenty-one (21).  (See attached roster).

Approval of ACC minutes

Members approved the minutes of October 19, with minor corrections. 

Appointments to ACC Curricular Committees

Commissioners approved the 2004-2005 Teacher Curricula and Certification Council Roster.

AGENDA ITEMS - Action Items

Reading of College Curricular Committee Minutes.  The following minutes came before the Commissioners:

Fairhaven College CC:  9/22/04, 10/20/04.  Accepted.  Commissioners learned that student-taught courses are taught along with a professor and require a 3-quarter preparation. Professor Eaton estimated that about two such courses are taught in any year, and they do generate SCH. The name of  “Professor Bowerr" was inadvertently omitted from a joint student-taught course entitled “Exploring Nature with an Artist’s Eye and Scientist’s Curiosity”.

General Education Requirements Committee: 10/7/2004, 10/21/04.  Accepted.  Commissioners noted and supported the GER motion “to recommend to ACC that responsibility for writing in the general education program remain with the GER committee.” 

Huxley College CC: 10/8/04, 10/15/04 10/22/04, 10/25/04 (w addendum).  Accepted.  Provost Bodman expressed appreciation to Huxley faculty for providing a thoughtful approach in converting ESTU/ESCI 306 into a core course for all students entering Huxley and then simplifying the cross-over requirements in which Science students must take two Studies classes, and Studies students must take two Science division classes.

Graduate Council,  4/13/2004.  Postponed.  Commissioners requested clarification of a Section 1 paragraph and the use of terms such as “mode, median and outlier votes”.  The ACC recommends no use of students’ names in the minutes (see 2004-2005 ACC Handbook), either as a matter of confidentiality, or  when what occasions the mention could any way be construed as embarrassing to the student.  This, of course, does not include student names that appear in records approving student/faculty designed majors in Fairhaven or elsewhere..  Students who are mentioned in minutes can be referred to as “Chris Doe” and more specific records can be maintained in the departments.  Members asked for clarification on the EDF513 replacement course and noted some typos on page 2.  Chair Downing will contact the Graduate School.

College of Humanities and Social Sciences,11/4/04.  Accepted except for two courses:  Library Research CSD 589 and History 505 Contemporary Historical Methods (no prerequisite needed – why?). Commissioners asked that  prerequisites to graduate classes be mentioned.  Members also hoped that graduate courses are coming to ACC through the Graduate Council and wondered whether CHSSCC should even be considering these.  Course Form for BA in Communication – Commissioners asked if the proposed  “replacement copy” courses actually increase the major or if they are “guided electives”.  454 appears to be required, but are the others? A course appears to missing in the latter case. 

College of Sciences and Technology, 1/8/04  Accepted.  Commissioners complimented CST on a well-done set of minutes.  However, they suggested that prerequisites for CSCI 227 can simply say: Math 112 or higher, unless there was a reason Math 117 is not included (it was omitted).

Discussion Items

Curricular Routing - MOTION

§         Commissioners reviewed a motion prepared and distributed by the Chair as recommended by the Executive Committee which would ensure that all courses taught at Western pass through a college curricular committee.  Currently there are various reporting routes (including no route) for interdisciplinary academic programs such as American Cultural Studies, East Asia Studies, International Studies, Women Studies, and Canadian American Studies.  There may be others such as Honors, Library Information, Marine Sciences, etc.

§         A consensus emerged that it would be preferable to form an altogether new committee to review curriculum from interdisciplinary programs.  Forcing programs to submit their materials to an existing college committee would in some cases be arbitrary, and it might awkwardly fail to reflect administrative reportage.  Further, it would be just strange to do so in the case of such things as FIG seminars. The commission feels that there is no hurry on this issue, and the Provost and the rest of the ACC Executive Committee agreed to devote some thought to it before it returns to the commission for action.  

Motion re FIGS

§         In response to a mandate from the Faculty Senate (11/24/03) commissioners reviewed a tentative motion prepared and distributed by the Chair to form an Ad Hoc Committee on the Assessment of the FIGs program. [Professor Eaton suggested that we go beyond assessment and include “evaluation.”] The intention is to get better informed on the present program and determine whether it serves the purposes for which it was designed, as well as to determine whether the program and those purposes have evolved.

§         Commissioners recommended a broad charge that would involve both assessing and evaluating the program as well as answering central questions such as: How are the teachers selected for the FIGs program?  Who does the selecting?  How are faculty for the FIGs evaluated? What are the specifics and mechanics of how FIGs works? – and numerous others, including some specifically mentioned in the Senate motion. However in evaluating the FIGs, Commissioners do not want a committee simply to check off the answers to a list of questions.  Consequently, the charge to the committee will permit considerable latitude to the committee.

§         The committee will be asked to submit an interim report to enable the commissioner to determine whether all of the issues that commissioners might have regarding FIGs are being addressed.

§         The Executive Committee will bring back a modified charge for a five person committee (four faculty, one student).  Specific questions will be asked, but it will be made clear to the committee that its task is not simply to run down the list of questions and answer them; they will simply provide some guidance.

Writing Proficiency

§         Members endorsed the GER Committee’s purview over writing and writing proficiency courses.  Provost Bodman will have Assessment (Joe Trimble, Sharon Schmidt) collect the data on existing courses – which can be currently identified in “Classfinder”.

§         The GER committee will have more time to address specific questions after February when the catalog copy is complete.  Rather than coming up with random questions for the committee “on the fly,” commissioners will request a list of courses or sections of courses that are designated writing proficiency at the moment, asking the departments how they select, and leave it at that. 

§         Provost Bodman will provide material to the GER Committee, and Linda Kimball will inform the committee so that they will be able to get an overview of writing proficiency courses as they currently exist.

§         As it is in many cases now, some courses are offered on some occasions as carrying writing proficiency credit, and on some occasions not. Provost Bodman agreed that it might make sense to add a suffix at the end of a course indicating that on a particular occasion it is a “WP” class.  Adding or removing a suffix at the end from quarter to quarter will enable an auditing system to track writing courses more efficiently and to let the student know what is available.

General Studies (GS) Major.

§         Members continued discussion on how to address the GS major and relieve tension between the desire for greater planning and the need to get students through who don’t have a major until late in their senior year.

§         ASVP Brian Gettmann noted there are lots of differences of opinions on the GS major among students. However he mentioned a concern that having students graduate under General Studies lowers the bar for the rest of the students and in a way seems to devalue others’ degrees.  Gettmann said many students would like to see this major eliminated. Others questioned whether having a General Studies major available does in any way genuinely devalue other majors at WWU.

§         Provost Bodman averred that he is not at all sure there is evidence that the GS degree devalues a Western degree; he nevertheless suggested we need to back away from what we are currently doing which is constructing a “house out of driftwood” (though some expressed a fondness for such houses). He asked two questions:  should we have a general studies degree at all, and if not, will we need a four-year strategy to eliminate it? 

§         Commissioners requested a clearer profile of the GS graduate.  If there are 100 students in the GS major, let us see patterns that lead to the choice. Commissioners requested the information from the Registrar.  .

§         Commissioners recommended getting the “gatekeeper” courses – the courses that constitute barriers to success in a traditional major -- out of the senior year, so that students can discover that these are barriers earlier and they can find some alternative in a timely fashion, for example, a more well-structured general studies major than the one we now have.

§         Robert Thorndike suggested doing what University of Washington does, which is offer a BS degree and a sort of “second class” degree such as a BA degree in the same area.  Maryann Reynolds reported that CBE already offers a “general business major” available in accounting, in finance, and in decision sciences. There is a similar option in Music, according to Commissioner Donnellan.

§         Jeff Newcomer pointed out the problem here is that students choose the lesser option in the beginning, denying themselves opportunity when they could very well achieve the more rigorous degree. Indeed, many students might see  these majors as an attractive “target” rather than a backup, and that the effect of having many students opting for such degrees would be to water down many programs.

Constituent Concerns

Jeff Newcomer requested that the question on the “course change” forms which currently asks if a course change will affect another department and needs only a “yes” or “no” answer, be changed to:  HOW does this change affect students in other departments?  Commissioners noted that the “resource question” also ought to be added to the course form. 

Adjournment

Commissioners adjourned at 6:00 pm.

Rose Marie Norton-Nader, Recorder, November 16, 2004. 

ACADEMIC COORDINATING COMMISSION 2004-2005 ROSTER