COLLEGE CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
September 8, 2010
MINUTES
Members Present: Colin Archibald, Joe Bivins, Melody Boeringer, Chris Borglum, Karen Borglum (co-chair), Diane Dalrymple, Dan Dutkofski, Bob Gessner, Yolanda Gonzalez, Celeste Henry, David Jones, Anita Kovalsky, James McDonald, John Niss (co-chair), Kristy Pennino, George Rausch, Pam Sandy, Betty Wanielista
Ex-Officio Present: Alys Arceneaux, Kurt Ewen, Jared Graber, Reyna Rangel (for Belen Caba), Cheryl Robinson, George, Ruiz, Edwin Sanchez
Staff Present: Kim Adams (recording)
Guests Present: Fran Frierson
John opened the meeting with a welcome to the new academic year. He then moved quickly into the Review of the Minutes, asking if there were any revisions or corrections for the July meeting minutes.
1. Review of Minutes – July 14, 2010
There were no revisions noted for the July 14 meeting minutes, which were approved as submitted.
2. Consent Agenda – Course modifications or deletions involving minor editing of course descriptions or level changes which do not impact other departments are eligible for placement on the consent agenda. Any members of the committee may request to remove a proposal from the consent agenda for the purpose of discussion.
The following course(s) have outlines in Course Outline Builder which may be viewed in ATLAS:
CJE 2003 Career Choices in Criminal Justice
The following outlines are being presented as part of the Two-Year Program Review Cycle (in COB, the course number will be followed with the number 2 in parentheses [i.e., OST 1108 (2)])
OST 1108 Building Keyboarding Speed and Accuracy
OST 1305 Proofreading
OST 1330 Business Grammar
OST 1335 Business Communications
OST 1355 Records Management and Legal Implications
REA 0001C College Preparatory Reading I
The Consent Agenda was approved by consensus, as submitted.
3. Regular Agenda
There were no Regular Agenda items this month; however, two Discussion Items were moved to the Regular Agenda for a vote, once the discussion took place, as follows:
1011-001 Lab Hours Task Force Manual Karen Borglum
This item was discussed as part of the Discussion Items portion of the Agenda (see page 6 for full discussion). At the end of the discussion, John Niss asked if everyone felt comfortable with moving this item to the Regular Agenda with the recommendation that it be taken to the College Learning Council for final approval. The Committee agreed, and approved the recommendation by consensus.
0910-213 Provisional Course List Karen Borglum
This item was very briefly discussed as part of the Discussion Items portion of the Agenda. Karen told the CCC that the Provisional Course List, which was reviewed and approved to take to the CLC at the July 2010 meeting, was presented to the CLC at its last meeting in September. They, in turn, made the recommendation to include the Prep Courses – both levels of prep - and EAP courses. Karen asked to move this to the Regular Agenda for approval, as well. The Committee agreed, and this item was moved and approved by consensus.
4. Discussion Items
· Introduction of new CCC Representatives and Alternates – New members and alternates will be introduced to the Committee.
As part of the Agenda package, a handout was provided, listing new members and re-appointees. John asked everyone present to introduce themselves, as there are a number of new members.
Karen then welcomed everyone and said she hoped everyone would have a very productive year.
· 2010-2011 Curriculum Committee Goals
o A.A. Program Outcomes
o Gen Ed Alignment
Karen Borglum will lead a discussion focusing on the goals of the Curriculum Committee for the upcoming 2010-2011 Academic Year.
Gen Ed Alignment
Karen began by telling the Committee that, for several years, the alignment of General Education between Valencia’s A.A. and A.S. degree programs has been a goal. There have already been several meetings with UCF; during the course of those meetings we asked them, “If students did not complete their degree program at Valencia and wanted to transfer to UCF, which courses would be accepted so that the students would not need to repeat a general education course already taken at Valencia?”
The information from these joint meetings was gathered, there will be another meeting with UCF this Friday, September 10, and Karen will bring recommendations out of the meetings back to the CCC. She asked for the CCC’s consensus in meeting this goal this academic year. The Committee was in agreement.
A.A. Program Outcomes
Beginning with some history, Karen said that an e-mail went out several months ago from Lisa Macon regarding faculty compensation and the link to institutional effectiveness. A major goal in the integration of institutional effective with compensation is for every area of the college to have outcomes established by May 2011. At this point in time, the only program in the college that does not have outcomes is the A.A. Degree Program, since all of the A.S. degree programs have had outcomes established for them. In the A.A. Degree Program, 36 of the 60 required hours are already covered under the outcomes previously established for general education; the other 24 will need to have outcomes. Since many of those hours are for elective courses, Karen said that the outcomes should probably be general, yet measurable.
Colin expressed concern that outcomes that are too general will not be measurable. Karen said that she has thought a lot about that, and has had discussions with Kurt, as well. She said that, among other things, LifeMap can be a tool used in developing these outcomes, since students will take a variety of electives, many based on their career goals.
There was quite a bit of discussion; many members felt that the only identifiable outcome is that the program should prepare a student for transfer to an upper division college or university. If there are to be other outcomes established, the need will be to find quantifiable outcomes, since those can be measured.
Karen said that a decision does not need to be made today, but the conversation needs to begin, since specific deadlines have been established for institutional effectiveness and outcomes.
Joe suggested that part of the outcomes could include counseling, both academically and from the student services area, to help students identify the courses (elective) that they need to be successful and to be able to transfer. John said that there are also many students who have a goal of finishing their A.A. Degree, but do not necessarily plan on transferring. This must be taken into consideration, as well.
It was the general consensus that it will be very difficult to find outcomes that will be measurable. It was suggested that one of the only things that can be measured is whether a student is making informed decisions regarding the courses they are taking to meet their goal of an A.A. Degree.
Karen asked Kurt to describe the difference between program learning outcomes and program outcomes. Kurt said he was surprised that TVCA had not entered into the discussion, since this is a crucial element in developing outcomes. He said that the differences are:
Program Learning Outcomes – student behavior that comes from the program of study, i.e., thinking critically;
Program Outcome – a quantitative measure of the program – e.g., number of transfers; how well the student does in the first semester following transfer; etc. – most of these are captured by IR so should be relatively easy to obtain.
John said that Think, Value, Communicate, and Act (TVCA), established several years ago and effectively utilized, should definitely be utilized in determining outcomes.
Karen asked Bob Gessner, as Faculty Council President-Elect, for his suggestions on how to proceed. He said that a committee comprised of faculty members was his thinking. Karen asked when the next Faculty Council meeting is, so that faculty members can be placed; she also said that she would like to see the committee a joint one, comprised of the Faculty Council and the CCC. She asked for CCC volunteers, and a number of people quickly agreed to be involved in the planning – Bob Gessner, Dan Dutkofski, Kurt Ewen, Karen Borglum (who will chair the group), Joe Bivins, Chris Borglum, and Yolanda Gonzalez all volunteered. Karen will ask Lisa Macon to join them, as well.
· CCC Membership and Voter Lists – Karen Borglum will discuss the composition of the Curriculum Committee and Voter Lists – current policy, requested changes, and whether the current procedures should be revised. (Curriculum Committee Manual, Pages 4; 6)
Karen directed Committee members to the new CCC Manual, provided for each person in attendance, in order to look at membership and voter list requirements. She said that a discussion began at the June, 2010 meeting that was tabled until the summer was over and more people were in attendance.
The question right now is, “Should the Committee add (or delete) membership for the upcoming year?” There have been requests for representation in architecture (in addition to Engineering); and a request for additional dean representation has been made. Dan said that the membership and voter lists run parallel to one another; and they were established at a time when curriculum was very different than now.
Karen said that an additional issue that has come up with the voter lists (ref. CCC Manual, Page 6) is that faculty who are on a voter list are credentialed in a specific discipline, and have their major teaching responsibility in a specific area. Some deans have been taking the liberty of removing faculty from a voter list, when their major teaching load is in that discipline; additionally, some are putting people on who are 4- or 10-month, or who are not qualified according to the Curriculum Committee Manual.
Membership – After reviewing the manual, Dan said that he believes that the representation is not meant to include EVERY department, but to be broad and inclusive of the major areas. Karen said that the committee must be sensitive, however, to give all areas a voice.
Several changes to the wording in this portion of the Manual were recommended, along with a few miscellaneous changes. Kristy Pennino requested that the area of Fine Arts be changed to “Arts and Entertainment.” She said that, particularly for East Campus, there are not many fine arts faculty members, and this would be inclusive of the areas of Graphics, Film, Music, Theatre, etc. Other changes were suggested, including the manner in which CCC representatives and alternates are appointed (by Faculty Council); and the changing of “Health Sciences” to “Allied Health.” It was suggested that the Student Representative be omitted, since it has been difficult to keep the students appointed coming to the meetings. Colin asked to add to the manual that the meetings are open and that guests are invited to attend and offer input. The recommended changes will be made and posted to the Manual that is online, and the print Manual will be updated for the 2011-12 academic year.
It was suggested that membership could be uniformly spread among the campuses; Karen said that had already been discussed and no real benefit was seen in doing that.
At this point, Karen went back to the request to split architecture and engineering and add an additional representative. Specifically, it was requested that Shannon Hellard be added, but she pointed out that his main teaching load is not in architecture. The faculty members that would be eligible, based on established criteria, would be Andy Ray and Don Watters. There were opinions that went both ways – do we add additional members to the CCC and perhaps “dilute” the committee to the point where people don’t show up because they think their presence isn’t needed? But it was also argued that there are representatives for business, public service, and IT, which are all under one dean, so perhaps there should be an additional person under engineering and architecture.
At this point, since the Committee appeared unable to come to a consensus, Karen said that we will move forward with the edits suggested, and re-visit the expansion of the membership at a later date.
Voter Lists - Karen said that it is important to note that there are times when a 4-month person has program chair duties, so probably should be on the voter list; however, current procedure states that they cannot vote. In addition, there are some program areas that have few or no full-time people, so the only option is to have 4-month faculty members on the list. It was generally felt that exceptions should not be made except in case of extenuating circumstances. Karen will have a discussion with the IAC regarding the addition of 4-, 8-, and 10-month contract faculty members on voter lists.
Some additional revisions were made under the section, “Voter Eligibility List for Curriculum Changes” on page 6: add an “s” to discipline/program; remove “assistant” in the last paragraph.
Karen reminded everyone that the lists are online, and can always be viewed at any time for possible corrections. Deans will be encouraged to review pertinent voter lists at the first department meeting held each academic year.