The Curriculum Committee met on April 12 and conducted the following business:
UCAPC Subcommittee Reports
Writing Across the Curriculum Committee: Joe Law, WAC Chair, reported that the committee has been considering the addition of a writing intensive course.
University General Education Committee: Henry Limouze, UGEC Chair, reported that Sean Kleefeld, Web Administrator, has developed a draft of a new GE website and that UGEC is in the process of reviewing it for content and functionality. Discussion continues on how to handle MTH 145 in view of the OBR Transfer Module Committee's failure to approve it.Course Inventory and Modification Requests
Approved Inventories: BIO 252, BIO 253, BIO 254, BIO 255, BIO 256, BIO 312, BIO 313, BIO 314, BIO 315, BIO 316, CL 194 (Upon agreement of the COSM representatives, the title for student record was changed in part from "Intro to" to "Careers in" so as to conform to the course title. Also, since BIO 252 through BIO 256 are deleted from inventory and now renumbered as BIO 312 through BIO 316 respectively, the committee wanted to be sure that any campus programs affected have been notified and program changes would be submitted).
Approved Modifications: BIO 411 (agreed to change prerequisite wording from "consent" to "permission" of instructor), EXB 194 (being cross listed with CL 194, the same change noted above was agreed upon)
Approved Inventories: DDT 149 (minor modifications made to the catalog description to fit the 34 word requirement), DDT 171, TOA 256
Approved Modifications: TEG 144, TEG 145, TEG 146, TEG 147, TEG 148, TEG 170, TEG 204
Returned Modifications: TEG 205 (because the catalog change description appears to produce an entirely different course, the committee requires additional documentation and suggests a new course inventory proposal be submitted)
CECS: Approved B.S. in Engineering Physics as follows
The following program change proposals were previously tabled at the March 11 meeting as the UCAPC members voted to do so in honoring the COSM request for additional time to review the proposals. Given sufficient evidence of lack of review time from submission, collegiality at the UCAPC level among members has a long standing history of granting such requests. The request was granted with the understanding that the COSM and the CECS would, if necessary, communicate and hold meetings with one another to discuss the program change implications and possibly come forth with alternative proposals. The UCAPC members essentially received no objections prior to the April 12 scheduled meeting. At the day of the meeting, documents were presented by the COSM objecting to the program changes based on the reduction in mathematics course requirements both presently and incrementally since 1999 and in comparison to UC and OSU and by the CECS in support of the program changes based on curriculum needs and course preparations. The UCAPC heard very compelling arguments from both the COSM and the CECS in support of their positions There ensued a one hour discussion that cannot be captured in the minutes, but some and only some points raised on the matter of process include: (1) given the the CECS and COSM signed agreement of January 11, 2004 (EGR 101 Plan: COSM and CECS) and approved at the UCAPC January 12, 2004 meeting, there could have been a better and defined channel of curricular communications between the colleges that preceded or accompanied the program change proposals (even though the letter of the agreement excludes a specific course that would have strengthened the intent of the agreement), (2) the CECS could have considered presenting all the intended program changes at the time of the EGR 101 discussions between the colleges and (3) given the request for additional review time by the COSM, the COSM could have proceeded to act upon the granted request immediately or within a more reasonable time since March 11. Another issue that arose and has arisen in past inter-college curriculum discussions before the UCAPC was discussed: given the Faculty Constitution charge to the UCAPC, does the UCAPC have oversight responsibilities with respect to an individual college proposal to modify an existing program or hear and act on another college's objections to the proposal? In consulting the Faculty Constitution charge to the UCAPC (available at Responsibility), the committee believes that the answer is "yes". After a one hour debate it became apparent that the discussion could not be advanced and a motion was made and seconded to approve the CECS program change proposals. The vote was tie and, therefore, the motion failed. Given what seems to be an easy fix to a breakdown in curricular communications and coordination, the committee remained confident that as with the EGR 101 Plan outcome an improved curriculum will prevail and be forthcoming shortly.
B.S. Biomedical Engineering (Traditional)
B.S. Biomedical Engineering (Premedical)
B.S. Industrial and Systems Engineering
B.S. Electrical Engineering
COLA: Approved B.A. in Criminal Justice program change as follows
LC: Approved* the Associate of Applied Science program changes as follows (documents available in the Faculty Office)
A.A.S. Mechanical Engineering Technology
Manufacturing Major -- terminate
Drafting and Design Major -- change to Computer Aided Drafting and Design Technology
* While the committee noted that the documentation revealed that the program changes were submitted for approval to the OBR in December 2003 and approved by the OBR in January 2004 prior to clearing the required WSU curriculum and Faculty Senate processes, it was announced that a meeting at the Provost's Office level has already been scheduled to assure better coordination between LC and main campus curriculum and Senate processes.
Academic Policy Changes
Next Meeting: the final UCAPC meeting for the academic year is scheduled for May 17. All proposals from colleges must be received with the original plus 19 copies by May 5, 12:00 noon. Submissions received after the deadline will be forwarded for consideration next academic year at the September or October UCAPC meeting..
Fresh Start Program Policy: the Petitions Committee's much improved recommended changes to the program (many thanks to the Petition's Committee for their diligent work) were approved and are available as follows