1 A T Panter Department of Psychology Chair Curriculum Review Erika Lindemann Associate Dean for Undergraduate Curricula Presentation for the Directors of Undergraduate Studies Toy Lounge Friday September 17 2010 ID: 791994
Download The PPT/PDF document "Review Update: “Making Connections” ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Review Update:“Making Connections” Curriculum
1
A. T. PanterDepartment of PsychologyChair, Curriculum ReviewErika LindemannAssociate Dean for Undergraduate Curricula
Presentation for the Directors of Undergraduate Studies, Toy Lounge, Friday September 17, 2010.
Slide22
“Making Connections” Review
Slide3the curriculum review team
3
Slide4The Curriculum Review Team
Committee
ReviewersFoundations
Rich McLaughlin (chair), Yaakov Ariel,
Glynis
Cowell
,
Chris Johnston,
Leena
Patel,
Dulcie
Straughan, Dorothy Verkerk, Heather Williams, Marilyn WyrickLiaison: Erika LindemannRepresented Constituencies = 8: Mathematics, Religious Studies, Art, History, Journalism and Mass Communication, Academic Advising, Undergraduate Curricula, Students
Slide5The Curriculum Review Team
Committee
ReviewersApproaches
Monika Truemper-Ritter (chair), Allen Anderson, Chris Carter, Aylim Castro, Art Champagne, Suzanne
Havala
Hobbs, Michelle
Hoyman
, Beth Shuster, Adam
Versényi
Liaison: Nick Siedentop
Represented
Constituencies
= 9: Classics, Music, Dramatic Art, Political Science, Physics and Astronomy, Public Health, Academic Advising, Undergraduate Curricula, Students
Slide6The Curriculum Review Team
Committee
ReviewersConnections
Barbara Wildemuth (chair), Olivia Blanchard, Drew Coleman, Bruce Fried, Kevin Guskiewicz, Li-Ling Hsaio
, Cheryl Junk, Sally
Mauriello
, Lily
Roberts,
Randall
Styers
, Christy Walker
Liaison: Nick Siedentop
Represented
Constituencies = 10: Information and Library Science, Asian Studies, Exercise and Sport Science, Geology, Religious Studies, Public Health, Dentistry, Academic Advising, Undergraduate Curricula, Students
Slide7The Curriculum Review Team
Committee
ReviewersSupplemental General Education
Kenneth Janken (chair), Conor Farese, Rebecka Fisher, Jackie Hagan, Ashu
Handa
, Kevin
Jeffay
, Barbara
Lucido
, Barbara
Stenross
, Jan
YoppLiaison: Erika LindemannRepresented Constituencies = 9: African and African-American Studies, Sociology, Public Policy, Computer Science, English & Comparative Literature, Journalism/Summer School, Academic Advising, Undergraduate Curricula, Students
Slide8The Curriculum Review Team
Committee
ReviewersMiscellaneousGary Pielak (chair), Bethany Corbin, Alice Dawson, Deborah
Eaker-Rich, Miles Fletcher, Dale Hoff, Roger Kaplan, Patricia Parker, Steve Reznick, Sherry Salyer
Liaison: Bobbi Owen
Represented
Constituencies
= 8: Chemistry, Communication Studies, History, Psychology, Education, Academic Advising, Undergraduate Curricula, Students
Slide9The Curriculum Review Team
Committee
ReviewersGeneral Education Criteria Document
Update
Erika Lindemann (chair), Dale Hoff, Kenneth Janken, Kevin
Jeffay
, Evan Lien, Richard McLaughlin, Abigail Panter, Steve Reznick, Nick Siedentop
Represented
Constituencies
= 6: African Studies and Afro-American Studies, Computer Science, Mathematics, Psychology, Undergraduate Curricula, Students
Slide10the review timeline
10
Slide1111
March
Four Years Later…2010
May
April
June, July
, August
Dean Owen developed committee charges
Committees formed
Steering Committee meets
Committees charged
Administrative Boards considered task
Comment period began
Student/faculty forums held
Interviews with key informants (advisors, former deans)
Existing data assembled
Syllabuses sampled
Syllabus rating rubrics created
Committees meet
Focus groups with students
Syllabus reviews conducted
Interviews held
Draft reports exchanged
Slide1212
September
November
October
December
2011
Committee reports finalized
Reports due 9.15
Ad Boards discuss recommendations: Approaches, Miscellaneous, Supplemental Education
Review updates provided
Ad Boards discuss recommendations: Foundations, Connections, Criteria Document
Ad Boards vote
Final report submitted
Report presented to Educational Policy Committee
Educational Policy Committee considers recommendations from the Ad Boards
Review findings presented to Faculty Council for discussion and vote
Slide1313
January and Forward
2011
Implementation of approved recommendations begins
Task forces formed if needed to address topics for further study
Next review?
Slide14some themes covered in the review
14
Slide1515
“Making Connections” Review
Slide1616
1. Number of Requirements
Slide1717
2. Intent of Requirements
Slide1818
3. Syllabus Review
Slide194. Specific Inquiry Areas
Mandatory writing course, no matter what? If so, how many credits should it be?Should students who place into Level 4 foreign language be required to take the course?How many LFIT courses are appropriate?
19
Slide204. Specific Inquiry Areas
Analysis Does Historical = Change over time, or is another history requirement needed? Does Philosophical = Content in ethics or moral reasoning? Can Literary vs. Visual & Performing Arts be differentiated?
20
Slide214. Specific Inquiry Areas
What is the ideal timing of Connection courses?Different requirements for Arts and Sciences vs. Professional Schools?5 out of 8 coursesIs the overlap of “Connections” designations and overlap with Approaches courses appropriate?
21
Slide224. Specific Inquiry Areas
What should be done with the Foreign Language Intensive requirement? Should Communication Intensive requirement reside in the major (or minor)? How should Experiential Education be handled given diversity of course styles and capacity to offer these courses?
22
Slide234. Specific Inquiry Areas
Should B. A. majors have extra courses?Different requirements for Arts and Sciences vs. Professional Schools?Is the Distributive option too restrictive?Is the Integrative option too restrictive and difficult to fulfill (cluster availability)?
23
Slide244. Specific Inquiry Areas
Is the Connections Curriculum too complex and overlapping? Is the writing requirement appropriate?Should there be an upper bound on: by exam (BE) credits?number of general education designations per course?
the number of majors and minors?24
Slide254. Specific Inquiry Areas
What is an appropriate level of overlap for double majors or majors with minors?Should these situations be permitted? two majors and a minorone major and two minors
25
Slide26where we are headed
26
Slide27Next Steps
The Administrative Boards will vote on specific recommendations in October. Approved recommendations Educational Policy Committee for vote
Faculty Council for vote. Some recommendations, if approved:Could be implemented today.Are complex and will need months to implement.Need an ad hoc committee for further study.In six months and one year from now we will look back to assess how recommendations from the current review have been implemented.27
Slide28q
uestions, comments?
panter@unc.eduulinde@ad.unc.edu 28