Meeting of the Faculty Senate

General Education Committee

325 Main Hall
April 5, 2010

Meeting convened at 3:35pm, Galbraith presiding

Present: Michael Current, Anne Galbraith, Tom Gendreau, Gerald

Iguchi, Riley Moore, James Pierce, Tom Pribek, Bob Ragan, Don
Sloan

Excused: Jean Hindson

Guests & Consultants: Troy Richter, Amelia Dittman, Kathleen Enz Finken

M/S/P, with clarification for describing students' options for GE

composition requirement: AP 5 = no course necessary, AP 3-4 =
choice of Eng 110 or ENG 112, all others ENG 110; voice vote,
unanimous

Kathleen Enz Finken, to comment on Higher Learning Commission

evaluation of GE, & GEC discussion
- HLC apparently wants evidence of change in response to assessment,
perhaps similarity to more common "scaffolded" program; ass. we have
now is limited to an SLO
- GEC process: next, verify SLOs all covered by assessment
- our new assessment person beginning work soon, can consult
with GEC on addressing HLC concerns
- could we add something broader than a course SLO, like "our
six main goals"?
- GEC maybe half-way through a review of "program itself"
(HLC document)
1. Major work of several years was SLO
2. Now, collecting data on courses that are supposed to
deliver SLOs
3. Query: Do we match targets/goals to process? And If we
address everything, what do we do with that finding?
4. Is revision needed for targets/intentions, the breadth of
program goals, or implementation?
- we need a justification of the essential quality of GE at UWL:
lots of credits, with very liberal student choice
- GE is cost effective & funds major programs; any change could
double or triple cost, and resources just aren't going to follow
any change
- can we attribute success (applications, retention,
employment) to GE?
- must demonstrate that we/re changing for improvement, that
we're not standing still; we have "nothing numerical" for that

Meeting adjourned at 4:42pm

Notes compiled by Pribek