Index of Topics 4/28/09

For Approval 5/12/09;  to Faculty Senate 5/18/09

Meeting with Curriculum committee chairs – Report

 

2009-10 Calendar of Catalog Deadlines – Approved

 

Off Campus programs – Discussion

 

Sudden Withdrawal – Discussion

 

 

WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY

ACADEMIC COORDINATING COMMISSION MINUTES

Regular Meeting  --  April 28, 2009

 

Chair Roger Thompson called the meeting of the 2008-2009 Academic Coordinating Commission to order at 4:05 pm on Tuesday, April 28, 2009.  There were fifteen (15) members present, the Recorder (1) and two guests (2) for a total of eighteen. 

 

Approval of ACC minutes Members approved minutes of April 14, 2009 with minor corrections.  

 

Appointments and Elections

Thompson announced the vacancies on ACCFaculty nominees are required from areas A, D,  G, H, 1 At-Lg and 2 Senators.  Please forward names to Senate office.  The Senate appoints in Spring quarter.

Report from the Chair

Chair Thompson reported on the curriculum information meeting held to familiarize faculty on new E-forms: 

o   New E-forms will be coming out next week and will include pop-ups to explain various information items that may seem confusing to faculty (such as concurrency, co-requisites, etc., for example)

o   New GUR E-form will contain Western’s GUR competencies so faculty can easily check off how courses meet competencies.  This will be an important part of the new assessment standards.  Faculty are encouraged to include the competencies in their syllabi so that students can better understand how courses link to general education competencies.  Four one-word categories borrowed from the LEAP initiative are used as headers, but the competencies are what Western already uses.

o   Kathy Knutzen raised the issue of sharing the LEAP initiatives with the campus prior to publishing the E-Forms, and learned that it is the Western competencies that are on the form with only 4 headers added.  The GER committee will be meeting to have this very discussion and will make recommendations to ACC for final recommendations. The GER committee has voted for participation in the LEAP initiative but to keep our own competencies. The GER committee is reviewing additional useful resources that we may freely borrow from the LEAP initiative (see links on ACC website).  Additional information is forthcoming.

 

ACTION ITEM:

Commissioners accepted for approval the 2009-2010 Catalog Copy deadlines as follows:

 

  APPROVAL OF COPY DEADLINES FOR 2010-11 CATALOG

  Call for Catalog Copy 2010-2011

Copy is available electronically for academic departments  and administrative units to begin making edits to their catalog copy as approved by ACC  

May/June 2009

Graduate Council  - Curriculum Submission  

Nov 13, 2009

Teacher Curriculum and Certification Council - Curriculum Submission

Jan 6, 2010

Committee on Undergraduate Education -

Curriculum Submission

Jan 15, 2009

Final ACC and Catalog Curriculum Approval  

For consideration for the Feb 10, 2010 ACC Meeting, please ensure that 35 copies (collated stapled and 3-hole punched) of your minutes are received by the Faculty Senate office by January 26th, 2010  

Jan 26, 2010 (Senate Office)

Feb 10, 2010

(ACC approval)

Catalog Copy due to Curriculum Office

Final catalog copy sent electronically to the Catalog Coordinator with all the edits and changes listed as approved by all curricula committees and ACC 

Feb 12, 2010

 

Report from the AS Committee.  Nikki Brown distributed the report from the AS which detailed the responses to a survey asking students if and how they would respond to an online student course evaluation.

 

 

5.    READING OF CURRICULUM MINUTES (Exhibit B)

 

Curriculum Committee

Date

Topics

ACC Action

68

Fairhaven College

2/18/2009

New Course:  Fair397b

ACCEPTED

69

GER Committee

4/16/09

Course approval form revisions

ACCEPTED

70

Honors Board

2/10/2009

THESE MINS ACCEPTED AT MAR 31 MEETING

 

 

 

DISCUSSION:

Off Campus Programs

Commissioners discussed approval processes for courses offered off campus and through EESP (Extended Education and Summer Program), not only regarding oversight, but also in terms of off campus expansion that may be planned for the future, and the importance of a higher level of scrutiny around the standards. 

 

Approval in the Colleges.  Provost Murphy mentioned that the curricular review had become opaque several years ago but now it is intended that all courses from EESP are approved in the colleges where those courses fall.  There are only a few classes that do not fit into the review process.

·    But there appear to be many outreach programs, suddenly with new ones starting up here and there. As we look to the future we might want to consider a campus wide discussion on what it means to get a Western degree, and how we fit in in all these outreach programs where students get degrees in various settings. 

 

Oversight.  How do we do curriculum oversight, keep the programs connected to the campus, especially when after time they begin to morph into their own entities. We have a lot of work to do to ensure that our programs are all connected back to the university.

·    The question might be asked if this should be a topic of concern in a particular college or it is beyond us?  There is also an International Studies question:  If we approve a course and hire somebody non tenure track in Bremerton, why wouldn’t we be able to do that in Vienna or South America? .

·    And speaking from Huxley, we have programs on the Peninsula (degree programs), then at Diablo Lake -- non credit for Huxley majors but mostly geared for teachers, a program in Greece, etc., all with very diverse off campus requirements.

 

Catalog Challenges.  Lisa Zuzarte spoke from the point of view of the registrar’s office and CAPP encoding that all the colleges need to be involved. We need to know the requirements for the off campus programs.  We worked with Huxley and we now include Huxley on the Peninsula, and have had materials approved in ACC. 

·    For CAPP and Banner this had to be unified and located in one place; electives and various program courses must be agreed upon, not offered separately or listed in different areas. 

·    Susanna Yunker mentioned that it was important we do not have stepchild program -- or a student who claims receiving a degree here means more or something different than the program at Kitsap, for example.  Oftentimes they have the same number they have here on campus, but are being taught elsewhere.  This can cause repeatability problems.

·    Zuzarte would like to see a course have the current rubric as well as an EESP identification (EXT).  Once it gets the EESP rubric it loses the Science Education listing, for example, so it becomes difficult to recognize; this lends confusion to what is really not a clear-cut approval process.  How can we keep both identifications?

·    Some EESP programs are completely different, some are certificated non credit. Another problem -- courses offered in the summer, and we have no idea who is teaching them because they have no curriculum committee.

 

Community, Resource, Management Questions.  These are curriculum matters but have a management element to them also. ACC approved a course 10 years ago taught by any number of individuals, and now it is being taught by 6 other and different people.  We don’t do that on campus, the point is do we do it out there?

·    Kristi Tyran mentioned a weekend MBA program proposed in Everett where they are using the courses already approved in the evening, although they are actually teaching something else.  A course approved 10 years ago hopefully should not be taught the same way -- courses evolve. 

·    But how much a sense of place, a sense of resources, a sense of community, how much is that a part of our curriculum?  We want to make sure the curriculum meets our standards and values and meets our criteria on what curriculum is. 

·    The departmental focus and the faculty who teach here on campus are part of a community.  But if off campus becomes isolated and non-integrated then it is not the same.  On campus you have the writing center, and tutorial center, and all the support services; that ought to be part of the conversation too, facilitating that for our students.

·    You have to have empathy for people who are working and need online courses, but perhaps that is not our mission.  Perhaps providing that makes us overextended.

 

Quality.  There is also the question of  what role and expectation there is -- that when you go to a university you have the experience of being taught by a tenure track PhD?  If everybody that teaches is non tenure track and short-term only, that can be a very different experience.

·    We have to be very careful in distinguishing all these off campus programs.  The Huxley personnel committee reviews all the off campus programs, and Huxley faculty take students to sites where they are taught.  One good test is, can someone take a prerequisite at one of these sites and then come in and do well here.

·    K. Knutzen reported that her college doesn’t run that many off campus programs but is interested in looking at that. To retain the notion we are just going to be a residential campus in the midst of what is happening nationally is not really to be a part of the move toward high quality degrees acquired online and in other off campus ways.  However, the quality measure we insist on at Western has to take place with all of those off campus programs.  Quality issues are the issues I am hearing about and their environment.  You can offer a quality Western education off campus, but the quality control has to be in place.  Right now holes exist in the quality measures.  One example, student evaluations must come back to Western.  We have to insist on the quality control.  This is what we expect, these are the benchmarks.  We can do it purposefully with a focus on high quality. 

·    Steve VanderStaay concurred that Western is behind the curve in these issues.  We don’t participate and so have less of an influence in those spheres, for example in programs such as “Like college in the High School”.  Yet VanderStaay recalled that he taught in one program that had lots of oversight challenges, and at the same time lots of rebellion with the amount of work that had to be done. 

 

External Pressure.  There is the additional pressure from legislators and at the national level.  Some legislators are pushing that for example a course in Chinese History -- if it is taught at four or five different campuses should all be the same course, standardized and identical, and interchangeable. 

·    We cannot and should not be bystanders on these issues.  As these programs are going to grow we should think about how we want them to grow. 

·    Workload is another example.  If a tenure track faculty wants to teach an online class only, is that going to be his workload, and how do we classify that.  Or if he goes to work on the weekend in Seattle and teaches a course, will that be his workload, or is that overload?  These are issues the faculty cares about and we need to get ahead of them rather than cleaning up later.

 

Recommendations.   Perhaps we can ask departments:  do you have an accounting, a list of all off campus programs? 

·    We make sure of that with all the correspondence courses -- every year we get sent a copy of the curriculum sent to us so we can be reminded of what courses are offered. 

·    We ask how often have you visited the site, how connected are your faculty to the site? 

·    ACC can ask for information, but once the course is approved it is under the purview of the college.  But ACC can certainly remind people of their purview.  Once approved we do not intervene. 

·    Anything off campus might have to have a higher level of scrutiny.  For these we can suggest that we would like you to do extra scrutiny.

·    New courses are still being offered in EESP, and these are certificate programs that need a different type of oversight. A credit bearing course would have to come thru ACC.  The Provost or one of the Deans has to sign off on any of these courses first.  Can we at least ask for a copy of the latest syllabi for EESP courses? 

 

ACC can consider asking departments to review their off campus courses to make sure they are of the highest quality, and that they are measured by the same quality measure we insist on at Western.  Departments can offer a quality Western education off campus but the quality control has to be in place, for example, requesting that student evaluations coming back to Western.  We can set up the benchmarks and do it purposefully with a high quality focus.

 

Commissioners will continue to discuss the topic and make recommendations in future agendas.

 

Sudden Withdrawal

Commissioners discussed how to solve the problem of students who may have to withdraw suddenly and who are close to graduation.  Parents may lose their jobs, students have military service, or parents are sick.  Western needs to have some mechanism in place for these kids to get a legitimate degree who have been here three years or more and are willing to work off campus to make it happen.

 

Adjournment 5:16 pm

Rose Marie Norton-Nader, Recorder, April 28, 2009

 

ACADEMIC COORDINATING COMMISSION 2008-2009 ROSTER

 

Voting Membership (term ending 2009)

 

 

Chair – Roger Thompson 2008-2009

 

1

A – Roger Anderson, Biology (SENATOR) rep to UPC

P

 

Vice Chair – James Hearne

 

2

A -  James Hearne, Computer Science, Vice Chair (4 yr)

Exc

 

 

 

3

A – Spencer Anthony-Cahill, Chemistry (SENATOR)

P

 

Ex Officio

 

4.

D – Mark Kuntz, Theater

P

17

Provost Murphy  (v)

   P

5

E – Yvonne Durham, Economics, CBE

P

18

Lisa Zuzarte (Catalog Coordinator) nv

P

6

G – Robin Matthews, Huxley

P

19

Susanna Yunker, Acting Registrar, nv

P

7

H –Marsha Riddle Buly,  Woodring,

  P

 

 

 

 

Membership (term ending 2010)

 

 

 Guests:

 

8

B –  Billie Lindsey, PEHR, rep to GER Cte

Exc

1

Steven VanderStaay, VPUE

P

9

C – Roger Thompson, History, CHAIR

P

2

Kathy Knutzen, Assoc Dean, CHSS

P

10

E -  Kristi Tyran, Management

   P

 

 

 

11

F -  Julie Helling, Fairhaven

P

 

 

 

12

I – Sylvia Tag, Library,

P

 

 

 

13

S -  Andrea Godard, ASVP-Academics, 2008-2009

P

3

Rose Marie Norton-Nader, Recorder

   P

14

S -  Nikki Brown, AS

P

 

Members Present

15

15

S -  Brianne Kumar, AS

   --

 

Recorder and Guests

3

16

S-   Shanai Lechtenberg, AS

   --

 

TOTAL PRESENT   April 28, 2009

18

 

Members (18):    12 faculty (2yr terms) representing each area with 2 as Senators.  6 more members include:  Provost (nv), Catalog Coordinator (ex officio) and 4 students (1 ASVP).  ACC sends reps:  to UPC and to GER Cte.  Registrar & Recorder are permanent guests