Revised 09/12/11 - UPC 3

Criteria for Reviewing Proposals
for New or Revised Undergraduate Courses[1]

Course Title/Number: Faculty Sponsor:

a.____
b.____
c.____ / 1.  Are each of the required forms in the packet? These should include:
a.  New Undergraduate Course Proposal Form or
Undergraduate Course Change Form
b.  Departmental Syllabus (revised form from August 2010 – Attachment I)
c.  New College of Education Signature Page (revised 07/19/11)
2.  ___ / 2. Does the information on all the documents match? (e.g. same course name, description, etc.)
3.  ___ / 3.  Is an appropriate budget (department) account number listed? (This is a drop down menu now so there should not be an issue)
4.  ___ / 4.  In the case of a new course, has a new course prefix, number and name been obtained from Carol Didomenico or the State Catalog?
5.  ___ / 5.  If new or revised, does the abbreviated title for the course meet the 30 character maximum? (this is a built in feature on the form and should not be an issue now)
6.  ___ / 6.  If new or revised, is the course description under the 255 word maximum?
(this is a build in feature on the form now and should not be an issue)
7.  ___ / 7.  If listed, are the pre- or co-requisite courses appropriate?
8.____ / 8.  In section 3- Course Justification (New Course form), Section 4 of the Course Change form of the Undergraduate Course Proposal Form, are all sections completed adequately? (New Course, sections a-j, Course Change sections a-f)
9.____ / 9.  New Courses: is it clearly stated now this course will strengthen the undergraduate program? Or
Course change: is the nature of the change(s) clearly stated?
10.____ / 10.  Section 4 Other Course information (new courses) Section 5 (Course Changes) are all the sections completed adequately?
11.  Are course textbooks newer than 5 years old? If not, is there a justification why the text book is over 5 years old?
12.  (Course Changes only) Is this course certified to fulfill either the Gordon Rule, General Education or Exit Requirements?
SYLLABUS REVIEW
13.  Section 6- Are the Goals and or objectives for the course clearly stated?
14.  Section 7 Content Outline – Is there a weekly agenda with course content clearly described for each week?
15. Section 8 Evaluation of Student Outcomes – What evaluation system is used in the course? What are the assignments requirements for the course?
16.  Section 10 – Textbooks and Readings - Are the required readings current in the topic area of the course and if not, is there a statement and/or justification if publications are over 5 years old
ATTACHMENT I (if applicable)
17.  Has the use of technology been addressed?
17. Has the issue of diversity been addressed in this course?
CONCURRENCE:
Do you feel this course needs to be reviewed and approval given by another department/area? Does this course cross areas of expertise?

Recommendations from the Sub-Committee review:

Sub-Committee Member: Date:

This form can be found online at: http://www.coedu.usf.edu/main/cc/UndergradSubmissionInstructions.html#OTHER

[1] Non-substantive changes do not need to go to a subcommittee.