BACK TO MINUTES
BACK TO CUE
BACK TO SENATE

 

Text Box: Approved  by CUE VIA EMAIL
To ACC: 3/27/2012

 

Committee on Undergraduate Education                                                                                                  

                Meeting Minutes

 

Date:

2/23/2012

Time:

4:00 pm

Room:

OM 340

 

CUE called to order at 4:05 pm by Co-chairs Matthew Miller and Carmen Werder. CUE minutes of 2/9/12 had been approved via email and forwarded to ACC.  There were fifteen (15) persons present (see roster).

 

Viking Landing Debrief

Co-chair Werder distributed a summary sheet Viking Landing successes and needs.  These include:

Successes: More and different GUR faculty participated; the SkyBridge was generally a better location although a lot of traffic made it seem like a thoroughfare; more student participated than last quarter; students appreciated computer availability to access Classfinder; the student participants helped; faculty and advisors appreciated the chance to talk informally, and for all to learn about new GUR courses; the tone of the event was spirited and positive, and many noted that the concept is valuable.  It may take more time to get the event rooted into WWU culture so students can anticipate the event will happen.  We can build the event into the Viking Advisor.

Needs:  Greater publicity.  Potentially ask professors who teach GURs to take some minutes to speak to their classes and give them more information on the GURs. Set the date now and ask GUR faculty to “sell” it through their courses multiple times before the event.  GUR classes in particular to target because of high enrollment/multiple sections include English 101, Psych 101, Psych 119, and Math 112.  Other avenues:  RAs promote directly with residents; Western Front carries a story; promote thru other schools in area; prepare a blurb that GUR faculty can use to promote the event perhaps on Bb or Facebook.  Repeat what was done including Viking Village, Student Outreach and both hard and virtual posters across campus.  However if many students come there would not be enough time to talk to them individually.

Committee comments: Members mentioned location revisiting; however at least one member preferred to continue in the SkyBridge until further successes could be assessed; an earlier time schedule was also considered; and apparently it is not a good idea to schedule in a holiday week when students are extra busy.  Invite Summerstart faculty -- they know a lot about GUR offerings. 

The goal of the event is to increase student understanding of options and to convey the overall sense that they should be actively engaging in their liberal education rather than just checking off boxes.  Internalizing the realization that they can make different kinds of choices is a big step down the road.  So provide questions students can ask themselves when they are trying to choose GURs.  Classroom presentations alone will not get across all that we want about the event and its purpose.

Other ideas: Make VL information available in Class Finder; signage on how to participate, perhaps using a question such as “Do you need a ‘QSR’? then see me”; restructure stations by GUR category.  More chairs needed around the circle.  Refreshments beverages only; present more interesting GUR projects such as Robotics; have more incentives such as cool buttons if the feedback sheets are returned; provide context in the GUR faculty briefing notes as to what problems the event is addressing.  For example, faculty could receive an email that relays important data -- that “only 50% of students express satisfaction with the GURs” for example.  Faculty can find the event valuable since some may come with little understanding of any GUR courses offered across their entire discipline. Faculty may not realize that students are often working from “Transfer Equivalency.”  We need to keep assessing benefits and are not at the point to just go into large lecture classes without continuing the Viking Landing event.  We probably need multiple measures and redundancy to be effective.

 

REVIEW OF COURSE SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL AS GUR: “Globalizations since 1870”

TITLE / E-form

Course Name

CR

Dept Contact

CAT

Competency

FAIR 312F - 644021 cross-listed as

INTL 312 - 653172

Globalization Since 1870

5

N. O Murchu

SSC

2,10

The prerequisite language is confusing and may need cleanup in terms of commas and semi-colons to make it more understandable to students.  Linda Luke will work with the department contact to edit this. 

A MOTION was made by Nick Wonder, second by Chris Friday, to approve the submission as a GUR, as long as punctuation is inserted in the prerequisites for clarity.  CUE passed the motion.

 

DISCUSSION: Revisit “Needs” and other Initiatives; Bottlenecks

Development of a working plan for spring; some initiatives are higher priority than others.

Committee members request data on the distribution of GUR course offerings.  These  data should suggest where there are bottlenecks, and in which categories there are too many offerings and in which categories there are too few.  High demand classes are frequently filled with juniors and seniors.  Are they taking classes because they think they are easy or because they genuinely want to take the class?

Such data will enable CUE and departments to get more sophisticated in their recommendations for sections: sections for freshmen alone, a language course tagged for ACGM for example.  This connection can help enrollment; we can recommend ways to distribute uneven loads in certain categories if we have the data.

David Brunnemer recommended a pivot table which his office can create; such a table shows that ACGMs dip in winter quarter, for example, and when you take away the 200 and 300 level languages, there are not many ACGM offerings.  Over time this category becomes a bottleneck.  One psychology course has a waiting list of 800; for this course there are a lot of seniors and juniors who have been waiting to get in, thus pushing out the availability for freshmen and sophomores.  This course could be preloaded with freshmen-only restriction in Phase I and then reopened in Phase II.   CUE members reported high interest in a regular CUE data query and would like to see this type of data set from year to year and to see how it changes.  The information could be used to inform departments where bottlenecks are occurring and recommend where additional ACGMs could be created.  Right now there is no precedent for relaying data in this way.

 

GUR form:  Possibly revisit for clarity: where boxes go for the categories; location of explanations; how to assess outcomes vs. how to assess competencies (seems redundant).  CUE will consider in Spring quarter so an updated form will be ready for Fall.  Nick Wonder proposed working to clean up the language of the rubrics, too.

 

March 8th Agenda:  Strand ProposalsVice Provost VanderStaay will forward several strand proposals to the CUE membership for review prior to the March 8 meeting.  There will be some courses with an experimental number attached as part of these proposals .  Faculty are currently applying and providing full descriptions.  None of these proposals offer 4 GURs for 3 courses.  VanderStaay suggests that about four could be funded if they are quality proposals.  CUE recommends that at least one person from each of the proposals attend CUE on March 8th.   GUR initiatives will also be considered in more detail.  

 

CUE members interested in attending FYE conference in Vancouver in July should notify VanderStaay.

 

NSSE REPORT – Vice Provost Steven VanderStaay:

 

 

Sources include Institutional Research, Collegial Learning, and NSSE data:  Western is extremely successful, and our 6-year class that entered had highest grade index, markedly higher than national average.  Students of color and Latino students are extremely successful but we don’t know why.  High freshman retention rate is one signature of success, but we have a lot of leakage sophomore year (and lose 10% of freshmen by May – we lose all year not just summer).

Factors that influence retention: SAT score times high school GPA.  Higher scores and better prepared freshmen are more likely to be retained.  Other schools retain more Pell grant students because offer additional support. Less than a 2.0 in first quarter is biggest risk factor for not being retained.  Question how many first quarter freshmen with low 2.0 are Pell grant and also students of color.  Time spent in activities correlate with achievement.  Campus features and qualities correlate with achievement.  Seniors are happier than freshmen.  Freshmen report less engagement than freshmen elsewhere.

Level of academic challenge:  Western students only in freshman composition for one quarter.  Most schools and Transfers have 2 quarters writing.  

Correlation with reading and writing (CLA):  Biggest gain where students read a lot and write a lot. Survey indicates we are just average:  “Do you read more than 20 pages a week in Humanities class?” “Do you write more than 20 pages a quarter in Humanities class?”  How much you  read and write correlates to gain.  Our students read and write a little less.  Growth between freshman and senior year average.  But we are not an average university. 

Student/faculty interaction – not quite as academic as other universities.  Only 58% of sophomores are satisfied with GURs.

Adjournment – 5:36pm

Minutes submitted by Rose Marie Norton-Nader, 2-23-2012

 

 

CUE 2012 ROSTER

 

Present

Name

Role

Area

Term until

1

P

Borda, Emily

Faculty

CST

2012

2

P

Grimm, Jeffrey & ACC rep

Faculty

CHSS (2)

2012

3

P

Johnson, Diane

Faculty

At Large – GUR

2013

4

P

Friday, Chris

Faculty

CHSS (1)

2013

5

P

Miller, Matthew

Faculty

Woodring

2012

6

P

Arvizu, Fabiola, ASVP-Acad

Student

GUR, ASVP Acad 2011-12

2012

7

P

Abel, Troy

Faculty

Huxley

2013

8

--

Singh-Cundy, Anu

Faculty

At Large – GUR

2012

9

--

Tag, Sylvia

Faculty

Western Libraries

2012

10

--

Larner, Dan

Faculty

Fairhaven

2012

11

       --

Sapin, Julia

Faculty

CFPA

2013

12

P

Wonder, Nicholas

Faculty

CBE

2012

13

       --

Amy Stavig, Student Representative

Student

GUR ASVP Acad 2011-2012

2012

14

P

Werder, Carmen

Ex Officio

Writing Programs

 

15

P

VanderStaay, Steven

Ex Officio

VP Undergrad Education

 

16

      --

Loudon, Tina

Ex Officio, nv

Director, Advising

 

17

      P

Purdie, John

Ex Officio, nv

Director, Residences

 

18

P

Norton-Nader, Rose Marie

Recorder, nv

Faculty Senate, ACC, UPRC

 

19

      P

Luke, Linda

Ex Officio, nv

Registrar’s Office

 

20

      P

David Brunnemer,

Perm Guest

Registrar

 

 

 

(Rep from ACC – Jeff Grimm)

 

Total present 2/9//2012

15

21

P

Maya Price, Distingusihed Student

Senate office

15 voting members: quorum= 8