Docstoc

LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE

Document Sample
LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE Powered By Docstoc
					Memorandum


TO:         Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:       Pam Rinker
DATE:       September 17, 2008
SUBJECT:    Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
            September 9, 2008


1.    LSA Dean Terry McDonald highlighted several issues that would need the
      Curriculum Committee’s attention this year.

2.    Associate Dean Robert Megginson briefly summarized the committee’s
      procedures.

3.    The recommendations of the R&E Subcommittee were accepted.

4.    September Course Approval Requests were acted upon.

5.    Modifications were approved for the concentration in Informatics effective
      Winter 2009.

6.    Modifications were approved for the concentration in RC Social Science
      effective Winter 2009.

7.    Associate Dean Bob Megginson assigned pages from Derek Bok’s Our
      Underachieving Colleges.
                               LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                 Minutes of September 9, 2008


Present: Robert Megginson, Chair, Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Angela Dillard, Tim Dodd,
Andrew Fileti, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Laura
Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, Robert Wallin, Donna Wessel
Walker, Jeff Wojcik, and Evans Young.

Visitor: Terry McDonald, Dean of the College of LSA, and Marjorie Horton, Assistant Dean for
Undergraduate Education.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

CURRENT ISSUES IN LSA UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

LSA Dean Terry McDonald asked the committee to encourage proposals that involve international
and global studies, one of the many insights gleaned from last year’s faculty focus groups. He
especially applauded last year’s distribution approval of several study abroad courses since students
need to know ahead of time how these programs will count toward their degree. Civic education and
community outreach need more development as well, especially in providing academic preparation
before students begin projects. Dean McDonald asked the committee to take a broad view in
considering new proposals. Rather than putting up obstacles, he wants the committee to allow
departments and faculty to experiment, especially in trying new interdisciplinary coursework.

In preparation for the re-accreditation of the university two years hence, the college’s focus for this
coming year will be the assessment of the undergraduate curriculum. The committee will undertake
as a project the assessment of the QR Requirement. What are the goals and are they being
accomplished? In what year of their studies are students taking these courses?

Lastly the Dean reminded the committee about keeping resource constraints in mind in reviewing
curriculum proposals. This applies particularly to new requests for GSI funding. While the
committee’s top priority is the academic soundness of a proposal, they may need to remind
departments and faculty about the importance of using resources wisely. Many excellent proposals
can be implemented with the resources on hand. In closing, Dean McDonald expressed his
appreciation for their time and effort on behalf of the college.

CURRICULUM COMMITTEE PROCEDURES

Associate Dean Robert Megginson briefly summarized the committee’s procedures. After course
approval requests and other curricular proposals are submitted by departments, the Course Approval
Subcommittee discusses and divides them into ―consent‖ and ―discussion‖ agendas, which then go to
the committee as a whole for consideration. In a separate, parallel process, the Race & Ethnicity
Subcommittee reviews and recommends course proposals to meet the Race & Ethnicity
Requirement. If time-sensitive proposals are submitted during the summer, Dean Megginson
approves them and then asks the committee for ratification when meetings resume in September.

He noted that the Curriculum Committee as a whole generally operates by consensus. When
something must be put to a vote, it is restricted to nine elected or appointed faculty members and
three students representing LSA Student Government. As an ex-officio member, Dean Megginson
votes only in case of a tie. All committee decisions go to the LSA Executive Committee for review
and approval before becoming official. In addition to acting on course proposals, the Curriculum
Committee meets once or twice a month for discussion on broader curricular issues.

Dean Megginson also reminded committee members that he is the designated spokesperson to media
and the press. As stated in the Standard Practice Guide, others must be careful to identify their
opinions as personal rather than official. In order for the college to speak with one voice, he
encouraged members of the Curriculum Committee to refer media questions to him.

RACE &ETHNICITY COURSE APPROVALS
The committee accepted the following recommendations as summarized on the attached R&E
Subcommittee Report.

    Approve (6)

        New / Blanket
        1.   CZECH 315. The Czech New Wave and Its Legacy. Herbert Eagle. Winter 2009
        2.   HISTORY 255. Gandhi's India. Farina Mir. Winter 2009.
        3.   HISTORY 320. Britain, 1901-1939: Culture and Politics. Kali Israel. Fall 2008.
        4.   RUSSIAN 358. Central Asia through Russian Eyes. Olga Maiorova. Winter 2009.

        Topic-Specific Recertifications

        5. CAAS 458. Black World Issues: The Southern Novel in Black & White. Visiting
           Professor Scott Ellsworth. Fall 08. One Year Only.

        Recertification / Topic Specific

        6. SOC 105. First Year Seminar: Transforming America: Immigrants Then & Now.
           Silvia Pedraza. Fall 2008.

SEPTEMBER COURSE APPROVAL REQUESTS

        1. The committee approved a total of 67 course approval requests: 2 deletions, 33
           modifications, and 32 new courses (see Appendix for a complete listing).
        2. Eight courses were approved for distribution and/or college requirement effective Winter
           2009:
           a. HU: CZECH 315 and RUSSIAN 358.
           b. NS/BS-eligibility: CHEM 351 and GEOSCI 175/ENVIRON 175.
           c. SS: ANTHRCUL 230, HISTORY 346/AMCULT 348, and RCSSCI 260.
           d. Language Requirement: RUSSIAN 223.
        3. The committee deferred 6 course approval requests as follows:
           a. ITALIAN 333. The department’s request to remove MEMS 333 as a crosslisting
               was deferred pending a request for additional information as to the department’s
               rationale. Also, using long-term meet-togethers as an alternative is not in keeping
               with college guidelines.
           b. AAPTIS 506, Intensive Advanced Arabic Media I and II, was deferred pending
               additional information from the department. Since the college has not yet approved
               this type of web-based courses, such a precedent would require much more
               discussion. Also, the course description indicated that it would be offered during
               summer term, yet only full-term credits were requested. Half-term classes are
               required to meet 12 hours weekly to earn 6 credits.
            c. ENVIRON 207, Introductory Ethnobotany, was deferred due to concerns about
               possible overlap with current courses such as BIOLOGY 102. The committee also
               recommended that Environment request an EEB crosslisting and wanted assurance
               that this would be long-term course offering.
            d. HISTART 395 was deferred with a recommendation that the department use the
               existing topics course number, HISTART 394.
            e. HISTART 490 was deferred with a recommendation that the department use the
               existing topics course number, HISTART 489.
            f. HISTORY 239/AAPTIS 239/ACABS 239/GEOSCI 239 was deferred due to
               questions about the requested crosslistings. They seem to contradict the instructor’s
               stated intent that ―the connections and interactions between parts of the world
               become the main subject of investigation, not the individual countries or parts of the
               world. These are not studied separately, as would usually happen in most courses
               (the vast majority of classes are nationally or regionally defined).‖ The committee
               also thought the crosslistings might be confusing students.

CONCENTRATION MODIFICATIONS (see attached proposals for details)

    1. Modifications for the concentration in Informatics were approved effective Fall 2008.
    2. Modifications for the concentration in RC Social Science were approved effective Winter
      2009.

MATTERS ARISING

In the context of the college’s assessment of the undergraduate curriculum, Associate Dean
Megginson gave everyone a copy of Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much
Students Learn and Why They Should Be Learning More, written by Derek Bok. As a former
president of Harvard University, Bok includes a lot of research and insights that provide a helpful
learning exercise. Dean Megginson asked the committee to read pages 127-136 in preparation for
next week’s discussion on the QR Requirement.

The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.

Next Meeting: Discussion

Tuesday, September 16, 2008, at 3:10 pm
2001 LSA Building
Memorandum


TO:          Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:        Pam Rinker
DATE:        September 25, 2007
SUBJECT:     Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
             September 16, 2008



        1. The minutes of September 9, 2008 were approved.

        2. In an initial assessment of the goals of LSA’s QR Requirement and how well
           they are being achieved, the committee discussed pages 127-136 of Derek Bok’s
           book, Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students
           Learn and Why They Should Be Learning More.
                                    LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                      Minutes of September 16, 2008


Present: Robert Megginson, Chair, Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Angela Dillard, Tim Dodd, Andrew
Fileti, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Laura Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam
Rinker, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, Robert Wallin, Donna Wessel Walker, Jeff Wojcik, and Evans Young

Visitor: Marjorie Horton, Assistant Dean for Undergraduate Education

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of September 9, 2008 were approved.

QUANTITATIVE REASONING REQUIREMENT

In an initial assessment of the goals of LSA’s QR Requirement and how well they are being achieved, the
committee discussed pages 127-136 of Derek Bok’s book, Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look
at How Much Students Learn and Why They Should Be Learning More. They agreed with Bok’s
recommendation that Quantitative Reasoning should permeate the entire curriculum, rather than a set of
courses with this focus. Courses that focus on the analysis and application of data within the context of a
specific discipline were deemed more effective than those that reward memorization. In the first group,
tools such as discussion, writing, and having students meet in small groups seem to be especially effective
in teaching students how to understand and apply quantitative reasoning.

The approval of the QR requirement was announced in the attached memo dated April 23, 1993 from
Michael Martin, then Associate Dean for LSA Undergraduate Education. It clearly reflects a sense of
excitement and anticipation with regard to a wide range of courses being created to fulfill the requirement.
Curricular development in this area has not fully lived up to these initial expectations. Many courses have
been approved to meet either QR1 or QR2 (see attached comprehensive list). Mathematics and statistics
represent the majority of QR1 courses, while QR2 courses offered under many subjects tend to provide
students an opportunity to analyze and apply data in a specific discipline. As a learning exercise, Dean
Megginson asked the committee to break up into small groups and discuss the characteristics of three QR1
very different courses: COMM 211; MATH 105; and POLSCI 391.

Current data reported by JoAnn Peraino, Curriculum & Enrollment Manager in Budget, indicates that about
half of LSA students fulfill the requirement with a course in Math or Statistics, primarily MATH 105 or 115
and STATS 150 or 350. Since the degree audit reflects only the first course that fulfills the requirement,
however, the committee requested information as to how many students complete additional QR courses
students during their college career. They also thought it would be helpful for faculty to know more about the
knowledge and skills of entering students with regard to QR concepts, such as using a database.

For the meeting on September 23, Dean Megginson would like the committee to draft a generic description
for courses that meet the QR Requirement along with their specific characteristics. They agreed that the QR
Task Force did a very good job in listing the criteria (see attached follow-up memo from Martin dated April
26, 1993). As time allows, the committee will discuss Chapter 8 of Bok’s book, ―Living with Diversity.‖
The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.

Next Meeting: Discussion

Tuesday, September 23, 2008, at 3:10 pm
2001 LSA Building
Memorandum


TO:          Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:        Pam Rinker
DATE:        October 21, 2008
SUBJECT:     Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
             September 23, 2008



        1. The minutes of September 16, 2008 were approved.

        2. Course approval requests were acted upon.

        3. The committee continued its discussion about the QR Requirement.

        4. The committee discussed Chapter 8 in Derek Bok’s book, Our Underachieving
           Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why They Should Be
           Learning More.
                              LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                Minutes of September 23, 2008


Present: Robert Megginson, Chair, Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Tim Dodd, Andrew Fileti,
Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Esrold Nurse, JoAnn
Peraino, Pam Rinker, Greg Tarlé, Robert Wallin, Donna Wessel Walker, Jeff Wojcik, and Evans
Young

Visitor: Marjorie Horton, Assistant Dean for Undergraduate Education

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of September 16, 2008 were approved.

COURSE APPROVAL ACTIONS

Three new LSA courses were approved as follows (see attached Appendix for details):

      1.    ASTRO 188: The Cosmos through the Constellations was approved effective Winter
            2009 as meeting the following: NS distribution, BS-eligible, and QR2 Requirement.
      2.    HISTORY 239/AAPTIS 239/ACABS 239/GEOSCI 239: Zoom: A History of
            Everything was approved as a new course effective Winter 2009. This proposal had been
            deferred on 9/9/08 due to questions about the multiple crosslistings. In accepting the
            attached rationale submitted by Prof. Douglas Northrop, the committee viewed this course
            as a different model for an interdisciplinary course involving faculty from a wide variety
            of departments. The committee did not think its interdisciplinary nature would be an
            obstacle in making GSI appointments. Dean Megginson noted a similar course titled State
            of the Planet is being taught at Cornell University and has been very popular with
            students.
      3.    HISTORY 299: Pedagogies of History was approved effective Winter 2009. This one-
            credit lab will be taught in conjunction with a primary course such as HISTORY 239. It
            will be taught by a GSI as allowed by LSA policy.
In response to the attached request from the School of Art & Design, the following course was
      approved:
      4.    UARTS 250: Creative Process is a new interdisciplinary, studio-lecture course to be
            offered in Winter 2009 (see attached flyer). The committee approved it as a non-LSA
            credit course earning Creative Expression (CE) distribution. The development of this
            proposal is being funded by UM’s Multidisciplinary Learning Team Teaching Initiative
            housed in the Provost’s Office. UARTS is a new subject created to promote more such
            courses.

QUANTITATIVE REASONING REQUIREMENT

The committee continued their discussion from the prior week of the QR Requirement with the
specific goal of coming up with a generic course description along with common characteristics. The
committee proposed using the following criteria and extended discussion in the report of the QRR
Task Force dated February 22, 1993:
      It is important to stress that quantitative reasoning is first and foremost reasoning. It involves
      defining a problem, determining how to solve it, deducing consequences, formulating
      alternatives and predicting outcomes. It must also include some aspect that is quantitative
      involving numerical or geometrical representation of real world phenomena. Quantitative
      reasoning is the methodology used to process and analyze quantitative information to make
      decisions, judgments and predictions.
      A critical distinction must be made here: Quantitative Reasoning is not mathematical
      manipulation or computation but rather the logical process required to make useful judgments
      based on quantitative information. In some instances, quantitative reasoning skills will be used
      by an individual to formulate his or her own arguments; in others, they will be used to evaluate
      competing explanations by others. Hence the quantitative reasoning requirement is not
      intended to address the complaint often heard from science faculty that students do not have the
      specific mathematical skills needed in science courses, although it may well be part of a
      movement which will have a salutary effect in this area.
      Courses which will satisfy these criteria must provide the student with quantitative tools and
      require him/her to make significant use of these tools in the context of the other course
      material. This material can be in practically any discipline, and we expect to be pleasantly
      surprised by the creation of innovative courses in unexpected areas. Some typical student
      activities might be:
            (1) Determining whether a proposed relationship between two or more quantities
                exists or is valid and to what extent other related variables need to be taken into
                account.
            (2) Extensive written analysis of quantitative relationships and the conclusions which
                can be drawn from them.
            (3) Working of quantitative exercises and problems whose answer cannot be reduced to a
                single number, formula, or phrase –in particular, cannot be answered by a choice from
                a list.
            (4) Design of experiments or surveys for gathering quantitative data to answer a real-
                world question.
            (5) Solving of complex real-world problems using non-routine calculations based on a
                non-trivial theory.
      Many quantitative reasoning courses will have some aspect of mathematical modeling of real-
      world phenomena. The expectations for such courses generally fall into one of the following
      two categories.
            (A) The student must first analyze the data to determine which of several models is
                appropriate and how it should be applied. Some analysis of the relative merits of
                several competing possible models may be expected.
            (B) The student is expected to construct a model or models and justify their
                applicability. Students may need to propose additional hypotheses and methods
                for testing them.
      Substantial assignments of type (A) would generally qualify a course for QR/2 (half QR
      credit) and possibly for QR/1 (full QR credit) status. A course which consistently includes
      assignments of type (B) would be an excellent QR/1 course. Note that the emphasis here is on
      the expectations for student work–merely including quantitative work in lectures or reading
      does not count much toward QR certification.
      We note that in some courses which might appear to involve mathematical modeling students
      are given models or systems of formulas and asked to produce numerical or qualitative answers
      by processing data. There is relatively little analysis required to determine which models or
      equations are appropriate and how the model applies is fairly obvious. Courses of this type
      involve little of what we consider quantitative reasoning and would need to meet additional
      criteria to qualify even for QR/2 certification. Other course characteristics which generally do
      not count as quantitative reasoning are:
             •    Use of a computer package to perform a calculation or study, unless the results are
                  subjected to extensive critical analysis, compared with other quantitative data, etc.
             •    Routine calculations or symbolic manipulations.
             •    Critical reasoning which involves numerical or geometric ideas in a primarily
                  descriptive way.

The committee then reviewed additional QR data (see attachment). They were encouraged by the
fact that many students go beyond fulfilling the QR Requirement by completing an average of three
QR1 or QR2 courses before they graduate. The committee noted that few courses in the Social
Sciences have been approved for the QR requirement and recommended promoting more proposals
from these departments. Lastly, they stressed that one of the key characteristics of a QR course is
applying quantitative reasoning in a way that directly involves students. They suggested several
specific ways of accomplishing this goal:

     1.   Deciding on appropriate analytic tools
     2.   Understanding, analyzing or interpreting data
     3.   Providing a narrative that describes the connection between the data and quantitative
          reasoning
     4.   Making a visual representation of data such as a graph or chart
     5.   Being able to understand and explain changes in data or unexpected results

LIVING WITH DIVERSITY

Dean Megginson led a discussion based on Chapter 8 titled ―Living with Diversity‖ from Derek
Bok’s book Our Underachieving Colleges. Bok uses two specific groups as examples of racial and
ethnic differences: 1) Blacks and Whites; and 2) Men and Women. Many people expressed surprise
that his choice of groups and his comments on both seemed rather outdated. Bok argues that the way
to resolve these conflicts is to foster diverse interpersonal relationships. In preparing students for a
globalized world, LSA places a high value on exposing them to different cultures and peoples.
Interestingly, a student on the committee from an underrepresented group shared that she sometimes
felt like she had been admitted to provide a laboratory for the majority.
The LSA curriculum addresses diversity in many ways, including the R&E Requirement and courses
in the Program on Intergroup Relations. The rationale is that getting students to interact with others
in diverse groups helps them to learn valuable life skills such as the following: 1) viewing others not
as a threat to one’s own identity but as opportunities for broadening their personal perspectives; and
2) respecting the opinions of others while not having to agree with them. Nonetheless, student
committee members thought that their peers across all groups tend to hang out with others like
themselves rather than risk broadening their interpersonal relationships with those who are different.
Reflecting a common complaint from faculty, the majority of LSA classes remain fairly
homogenous, even in courses fulfilling the R&E Requirement.



The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.

Next Meeting: Subcommittees
Memorandum


 TO:          Members of the LSA Executive Committee
 FROM:        Pam Rinker
 DATE:        January 12, 2009
 SUBJECT:     Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
              October 7, 2008


1. Minutes of September 23, 2008 were approved.
2. The committee acted on the October Course Approval Requests.
3. Modifications to the Biochemistry Concentration were approved.
4. Modifications to the Women’s Studies Concentration and Academic Minors.
5. The committee discussed curricular developments that might enhance opportunities in the
   areas of research, study abroad, civic engagement, internships, and experiential courses.
                              LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                  Minutes of October 7, 2008


Present: Evans Young (Acting Chair), Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Angela Dillard, Tim
Dodd, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Tim McKay, Jennifer Myers,
JoAnn Peraino, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarle, Pam Rinker, Donna Wessel Walker, Robert Wallin, and
Jeff Wojcik.

The meeting came to order at 3:15 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of September 23, 2008 were approved.

OCTOBER COURSE APPROVALS
     1. The committee approved 42 course approval requests, including 30 modifications and
         12 new courses (see Appendix for complete listing).
     2. The following courses were approved for HU distribution: AMCULT 220, American
         Humor; and ASIAN 332, South Asian Identity: Writing Home from Away.
     3. MCDB 402, Intracellular Trafficking was approved as BS-eligible.
     4. GEOSCI 468, Data Analysis and Model Estimation, was approved for QR2.
     5. LING 446/LACS 446, Comparative Linguistics, was deferred pending a departmental
         decision concerning the following recommendations: Renumber this course to the 300-
         level or keep it at the 400-level with the addition of advisory prerequisites and different
         intended audience. In either case, this course should earn 3 UG/RGAW (Rackham Grad
         with Additional Work) credits in a lecture-only format, along with a new course number
         for the optional, 1-credit discussion section.

MODIFICATIONS TO CONCENTRATIONS AND ACADEMIC MINORS
     1. Modifications to the Biochemistry Concentration were approved (see attached proposal
         for details).
     2. Modifications to the Women’s Studies Concentration and Academic Minors were
         approved (see attached proposals for details).

EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES IN STUDY ABROAD, EXPERIENTIAL COURSES AND INTERNSHIPS,
RESEARCH, AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

To follow up on the curriculum review meetings convened by the Dean last year, the committee
discussed curricular developments that might enhance opportunities in the areas of research, study
abroad, civic engagement, internships, and experiential courses. The attached examples drawn from
the LSA Online Course Guide reflect different models in each of these areas. Faculty members
pointed to several courses in their own departments used to offer experiential courses and
undergraduate research. Study abroad opportunities, however, can be especially challenging to
students with heavy academic demands and insufficient resources to pay the huge costs of travel. At
least they now can purchase insurance through the university for only $1/day. The committee
recommended creating more programs that follow the model of Global Intercultural Experience for
Undergraduates (GIEU), which offers subsidies for travel expenses.
In the area of internships and experiential courses, the committee considered AMCULT 388 to be an
excellent model. By coordinating internship opportunities at the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination
Committee or the Arab American National Museum in Dearborn, hands-on learning is embedded as
a vital element of the class. Unfortunately, a lot of students who want to do an internship are unable
to find a faculty sponsor. In addition, many business organizations require interns to be earning
credit and thus covered by university insurance. Some departments allow those who are unable to
comply to enroll in an independent study the term following an internship to evaluate and write
about their experiences.

The committee briefly discussed the college guideline that Experiential courses be graded Credit/No
Credit, contrasting them with independent study classes that often are letter-graded. Many students
prefer to earn a letter grade, which means that a Credit/No Credit grading scheme may serve as a
disincentive for enrolling. Others who may have plenty of credits would prefer to keep tuition costs
low, earn much needed income, or simply gain valuable experience. As an exception to the rule,
students who qualify for work-study are able to participate in research projects offered through
UROP and receive payment as well as earn 1 credit. When such experiences are not recorded on an
official transcript, alternatives are to include them in their resume and add them to their E-portfolio.

In the area of research, some faculty employ students to edit research documents or delve deeply into
small pieces of larger humanities and social science research projects. In the natural sciences, faculty
often need to first ground students in basic research methods, including specific lab techniques and
use of library resources. The committee thought one helpful approach in overcoming this challenge
is to require students to commit multiple years to a research project with the possibility of serving as
peer mentors. Sweetland Writing Center uses peer writing tutors as a trained cohort able to help new
students year by year, both paid and for credit. Student members viewed the use of successive
generations of researchers committed to a long-term project as especially beneficial to engaged
learning.

Since faculty involvement would be essential to any curricular developments in these areas, the
college may consider including their efforts in KPI data. The committee doubted this would be
sufficient incentive in teaching 1-credit independent study courses, which typically entail meeting
with students for about one-half hour per week per credit. They also pointed out that many faculty
invest a significant amount of time engaging students in research projects that do not count for
credit, meaning that is difficult to include these efforts in official college statistics. Other faculty
stressed the fact that junior faculty would provide a significant resource for enhancing these
opportunities. Unfortunately, most of them are working toward tenure and heavily penalized for time
spent in these ways. In closing, Jennifer Myers reported that over a lengthy period of time, the
Residential College has a developed many different models for offering students many such
opportunities, which she would be happy to share with the committee.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 pm.


DISCUSSION MEETING: OCTOBER 14, 3-5 PM
Memorandum


 TO:         Members of the LSA Executive Committee
 FROM:       Pam Rinker
 DATE:       November 5, 2007
 SUBJECT:    Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
             October 14, 2008


1. Minutes of October 7, 2008 were approved.
2. Course Approval Requests were acted upon.
3. LSA Academic Advising staff presented its annual report about current services.
4. The committee discussed the effectiveness of small distribution classes and large
   survey courses based on pages 255-266 from Chapter 10 in Derek Bok’s book, Our
   Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why
   They Should Be Learning More.
                               LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                  Minutes of October 14, 2008

Present: Evans Young (Acting Chair), Jennifer Crocker, Tim Dodd, Andrew Fileti, Mika Lavaque-
Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Esrold Nurse, JoAnn Peraino, Pam
Rinker, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, and Jeff Wojcik.
Visitors: Phil Gorman, Marjorie Horton, and Ching-Yune Sylvester

The meeting came to order at 3:15 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of October 7, 2008 were approved.

COURSE APPROVAL ACTIONS
  1. LING 446 and LING 456 were approved as new courses.
     2. UARTS 250 was approved for LSA credit in addition to CE distribution approved on
         September 23, 2008.

ANNUAL UPDATE FROM LSA ACADEMIC ADVISING

As highlighted in the attached documents, four staff members from the Newnan Advising Center
presented an update about their services: Esrold Nurse, Assistant Dean for Student Academic
Affairs; Tim Dodd, Academic Advising Center Director; Phil Gorman, Director of Academic
Advising Technology; and Ching-Yune Sylvester, Academic Advisor. All incoming LSA students
are assigned to a specific academic advisor with whom they can establish an ongoing relationship
throughout their undergraduate career. The broad scope of operations in the Newnan Advising
Center requires that staff stay informed and up-to-date about curricular and career developments in
various fields. Staff members are proactively engaged and collaborative in meeting with faculty,
professionals, and advisors from other schools. They involve students as peer advisors, through
committees, and in candidate searches, as well as consult with students to assess their effectiveness,
learn new ideas and initiatives, and determine the right mix and timing of their services. Beginning
this year, the center is beginning a more comprehensive review of their activities and plan to gather
longitudinal data as they follow each cohort of students until graduation. The results thus far are
heartening and will serve as a baseline for future assessment. The primary goal of all of these efforts
is to improve the ways in which they serve students. Once the data has been collected and analyzed,
it will provide useful information for faculty and others involved in curriculum planning.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LSA’S SMALL DISTRIBUTION CLASSES AND LARGE SURVEY
COURSES

The committee discussed pages 255-266 of Chapter 10, ―Acquiring Broader Interests,‖ from Derek
Bok’s book Our Underachieving Colleges. Assistant Dean Evans Young suggested that members
divide into small groups segregated by faculty, students, and staff to allow everyone time to
participate. The groups were asked to discuss the effectiveness of small distribution classes and large
survey courses in achieving the breadth of a liberal arts education. What works and doesn’t work in
each venue? What are the best practices and worst? How they could be improved? After 15 minutes,
the committee came together again to report out on their discussions.
Advising staff talked a lot about the ambiguity of STATS 350 earning NS distribution rather than
MSA, with the suggestion that this be reassessed. In general, they confirmed Bok’s primary opinion
that many different options are needed and considered LSA as successful in offering both small
distribution classes and large survey courses. The faculty group thought that first-year seminars were
especially effective as small distribution classes focused on a specific topic that could spark
students’ interest in a broader field of study. Large survey courses, on the other hand, tend to present
too many facts to remember, especially in natural science courses. Another problem is the need to
water down the content to attract non-concentrators. Faculty commented on the problems of dealing
with the pressures of grading, as well having to use textbooks that were too limited and ineffective.
They also expressed concern that the college’s distribution requirement serves as an impediment to
Engineering students who wanted to transfer to LSA.
The student group thought a more effective approach to achieving a broad education would be to
offer a large variety of options along with the freedom to take whatever naturally interested them
over time. Many students see the distribution requirements as a necessary hoop in order to graduate,
which prompts them to look for loop holes. How could the college orient students in a more positive
way and influence them to buy in to LSA’s graduation requirements? In general, they wish students
could realize sooner how many choices were open to them, rather than spend their first two years
checking off boxes on their Academic Audit Report.



The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.


SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS: OCTOBER 28, 3-5 PM

   NEXT FULL MEETING: NOVEMBER 4, 3-5 PM
Course Approvals
Memorandum


 TO:         Members of the LSA Executive Committee
 FROM:       Pam Rinker
 DATE:       November 5, 2007
 SUBJECT:    Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
             October 14, 2008


1. Minutes of October 7, 2008 were approved.
2. Course Approval Requests were acted upon.
3. LSA Academic Advising staff presented its annual report about current services.
4. The committee discussed the effectiveness of small distribution classes and large
   survey courses based on pages 255-266 from Chapter 10 in Derek Bok’s book, Our
   Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why
   They Should Be Learning More.
                               LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                  Minutes of October 14, 2008

Present: Evans Young (Acting Chair), Jennifer Crocker, Tim Dodd, Andrew Fileti, Mika Lavaque-
Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Esrold Nurse, JoAnn Peraino, Pam
Rinker, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, and Jeff Wojcik.
Visitors: Phil Gorman, Marjorie Horton, and Ching-Yune Sylvester

The meeting came to order at 3:15 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of October 7, 2008 were approved.

COURSE APPROVAL ACTIONS
  1. LING 446 and LING 456 were approved as new courses.
     2. UARTS 250 was approved for LSA credit in addition to CE distribution approved on
         September 23, 2008.

ANNUAL UPDATE FROM LSA ACADEMIC ADVISING

As highlighted in the attached documents, four staff members from the Newnan Advising Center
presented an update about their services: Esrold Nurse, Assistant Dean for Student Academic
Affairs; Tim Dodd, Academic Advising Center Director; Phil Gorman, Director of Academic
Advising Technology; and Ching-Yune Sylvester, Academic Advisor. All incoming LSA students
are assigned to a specific academic advisor with whom they can establish an ongoing relationship
throughout their undergraduate career. The broad scope of operations in the Newnan Advising
Center requires that staff stay informed and up-to-date about curricular and career developments in
various fields. Staff members are proactively engaged and collaborative in meeting with faculty,
professionals, and advisors from other schools. They involve students as peer advisors, through
committees, and in candidate searches, as well as consult with students to assess their effectiveness,
learn new ideas and initiatives, and determine the right mix and timing of their services. Beginning
this year, the center is beginning a more comprehensive review of their activities and plan to gather
longitudinal data as they follow each cohort of students until graduation. The results thus far are
heartening and will serve as a baseline for future assessment. The primary goal of all of these efforts
is to improve the ways in which they serve students. Once the data has been collected and analyzed,
it will provide useful information for faculty and others involved in curriculum planning.

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LSA’S SMALL DISTRIBUTION CLASSES AND LARGE SURVEY
COURSES

The committee discussed pages 255-266 of Chapter 10, ―Acquiring Broader Interests,‖ from Derek
Bok’s book Our Underachieving Colleges. Assistant Dean Evans Young suggested that members
divide into small groups segregated by faculty, students, and staff to allow everyone time to
participate. The groups were asked to discuss the effectiveness of small distribution classes and large
survey courses in achieving the breadth of a liberal arts education. What works and doesn’t work in
each venue? What are the best practices and worst? How they could be improved? After 15 minutes,
the committee came together again to report out on their discussions.
Advising staff talked a lot about the ambiguity of STATS 350 earning NS distribution rather than
MSA, with the suggestion that this be reassessed. In general, they confirmed Bok’s primary opinion
that many different options are needed and considered LSA as successful in offering both small
distribution classes and large survey courses. The faculty group thought that first-year seminars were
especially effective as small distribution classes focused on a specific topic that could spark
students’ interest in a broader field of study. Large survey courses, on the other hand, tend to present
too many facts to remember, especially in natural science courses. Another problem is the need to
water down the content to attract non-concentrators. Faculty commented on the problems of dealing
with the pressures of grading, as well having to use textbooks that were too limited and ineffective.
They also expressed concern that the college’s distribution requirement serves as an impediment to
Engineering students who wanted to transfer to LSA.
The student group thought a more effective approach to achieving a broad education would be to
offer a large variety of options along with the freedom to take whatever naturally interested them
over time. Many students see the distribution requirements as a necessary hoop in order to graduate,
which prompts them to look for loop holes. How could the college orient students in a more positive
way and influence them to buy in to LSA’s graduation requirements? In general, they wish students
could realize sooner how many choices were open to them, rather than spend their first two years
checking off boxes on their Academic Audit Report.



The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.


SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS: OCTOBER 28, 3-5 PM

NEXT FULL MEETING: NOVEMBER 4, 3-5 PM
Course Approvals
Memorandum


TO:         Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:       Pam Rinker
DATE:       November 12, 2008
SUBJECT:    Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
            November 4, 2008


1. Curriculum Committee minutes of October 14, 2008 were approved.
 2. The committee accepted the recommendations of the R&E Subcommittee.
 3. Evans Young provided more information about the process used by the R&E
    Subcommittee.
 4. November course proposals were acted upon.
 5. Several concentration modifications were reviewed.
 6. The committee recommended approving modifications to the CAAS Graduate
    Certificate Program.
                                LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                   Minutes of November 4, 2008

Present: Bob Megginson (Chair), Angela Dillard, Tim Dodd, Andrew Fileti, Mika Lavaque-Manty,
Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Laura Olsen, Pam Rinker, Naomi Silver, Greg
Tarlé, Donna Wessel Walker, Bob Wallin, Jeff Wojcik, and Evans Young.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of October 14, 2008 were approved.
RACE &ETHNICITY COURSE APPROVALS
The committee accepted the following recommendations as summarized on the attached R&E
Subcommittee Report.
      Recertification / Blanket
      1. HISTORY 261. United States History, 1865-Present. Lecturer Michelle McClellan.
          W09.

       Recertification / Topic Specific
       2. HISTORY 210. Early Middle Ages, 300-1100: Issues in Race & Ethnicity. Professor
           Paolo Squatriti. Fall 2009.
       3. HISTORY 211. Later Middle Ages, 1100-1500: Issues in Race & Ethnicity.
           Professor Paolo Squatriti. Winter 2009.
       4. HISTORY 230. Humanities Topics in History: Middle Ages & Modern Problems.
           Professor Owen Phelan. Summer 2009.
       5. HISTORY 368/AMCULT 342/WOMENSTD 360. History of the Family in the US,
           1870-1990: Issues in Race & Ethnicity. Professor Regina Morantz-Sanchez. Fall 2009.
       6. SOC 105/UC 151. First Year Seminar in Sociology: Conversations on Identity,
           Diversity, Democracy, and Community. Professor David Schoem. Fall 2009.

Evans Young provided more information about the R&E Subcommittee process. First, R&E
proposals must include all of the following:
      1. R&E Proposal Form
      2. Teaching Evaluations (summary IDQ statistics only)
      3. Annotated syllabus with a detailed explanation of how the course meets the R&E
           guidelines.
      4. 1-2 page explanation of how the course provides substantial discussion of all three of the
           following issues:
           a. The meaning of race, ethnicity, and racism
           b. Racial and ethnic intolerance and resulting inequality as it occurs in the U.S. or
                elsewhere
           c. Comparisons of discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, social class or
                gender

It is not unusual for the subcommittee to see low evaluation scores, but the reasons are not clear. Some
instructors think that lower scores are partially due to general resentment about the requirement itself.
Student members of the committee hear about disappointment when an R&E course does not discuss
these issues adequately. A few courses do not seem to address them at all. Thus far, the Office of
Examinations & Evaluations has been unable to analyze R&E courses due to the wide variety in the
level of instructors and size of the classes. Direct student input might provide a more effective way of
collecting this data, perhaps conducting a student survey or comparing scores for general IDQ items
such as ―I had a strong desire to take this course.‖

The discussion then shifted to course assessment. For example, some instructors find it difficult to
address R&E issues in large survey courses. How can they track enrollment and consider the impact
of the classroom climate? Adding more questions related to R&E issues could be added to the end of
term evaluation forms, but this would be likely to meet resistance. The current approach focuses on
asking students to evaluate the instructor rather than to assess the learning effectiveness of the
course. How well did it achieve the desired educational goals? How well did students actually learn
the material? What new skills did they gain? One faculty member of the committee has found it very
useful to ask students specific questions about their level of knowledge at the beginning of the class
and then repeat the same questions at the end of the term.

COURSE APPROVAL ACTIONS (see Appendix for details)
     4. The committee approved a total of 17 course approval requests: 1 deletion, 13
         modifications, and 3 new courses.
     5. GEOSCI 344 was approved for NS distribution and as BS-eligible effective Spring 2009.

CONCENTRATIONS AND ACADEMIC MINORS

As detailed in attached proposals, modifications to the following concentrations and academic
minors were approved:
       1. Biophysics Concentration
       2. Biophysics Academic Minor
       3. Informatics Concentration
       4. Math Concentration
       5. Math Academic Minor

CAAS GRADUATE CERTIFICATE PROGRAM MODIFICATIONS

Based on the attached ad hoc subcommittee report, the LSA Curriculum Committee recommended
approval of the modifications to the CAAS Graduate Certificate Program. Subsequent to approval
by the LSA Executive Committee, the college would send the proposal to Rackham with two
standard provisos consistent with existing policies: 1) LSA assumes that students will not be allowed
to receive these certificates unless they are in good standing in a graduate degree program in another
unit and are either making satisfactory progress toward that degree or have recently received a
graduate degree from another unit; and 2) LSA's approval commits no additional resources from the
college toward this program.


The meeting was adjourned at 4 pm.



NEXT MEETING: NOVEMBER 11, 3-5 PM
Discussion
Memorandum
  TO:               Members of the LSA Executive Committee
  FROM:             Pam Rinker
  DATE:             November 5, 2008
  SUBJECT:          Curriculum Committee Course Approval Actions
                    November 4, 2008


        1. The R&E course approvals recommended by the R&E Subcommittee were
           approved.

        2. Consent Items 1-16 on the November Course Approval Report were approved.

        3. Discussion Item 17: The revised course description for BIOPHYS 120 was
           approved. (See bulleted paragraph under Subcommittee Concerns.)

        4. Modifications to the following concentrations and academic minors were
           approved:
               a.    Biophysics Concentration
               b.    Biophysics Academic Minor
               c.    Informatics Concentration
               d.    Math Concentration
               e.    Math Academic Minor
Memorandum


 TO:         Members of the LSA Executive Committee
 FROM:       Pam Rinker
 DATE:       December 8, 2008
 SUBJECT:    Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
             November 11, 2008



1. Minutes of November 4, 2008 were approved.
2. The committee discussed issues concerning the assessment of learning outcomes.
3. Ted Spencer, Executive Director of Undergraduate Admissions, and Sally Lindsley,
   Senior Associate Director, presented an overview of next year’s entering class.
                               LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                 Minutes of November 11, 2008

Present: Bob Megginson, Andrew Fileti, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Jennifer Myers,
JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Naomi Silver, Donna Wessel Walker, Robert Wallin, Jeff Wojcik, and
Evans Young.

Visitors: Marjorie Horton, Sally Lindsley, and Ted Spencer

The meeting came to order at 3:15 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of November 4, 2008 were approved.

ASSESSING LEARNING OUTCOMES

In preparation for reaccreditation, Provost Teresa Sullivan has asked academic units to provide input
about what it is to be an international university. She has appointed a self-study group to conduct
research to understand our knowledge environment (see attached article from the University
Record). Their planning, information collecting, data analysis, and campus discussions will
culminate in a written report toward the end of 2009. An evaluation team from the Higher Learning
Commission will visit in March 2010. In addition to compiling data, they also want to identify
existing programs that engage the university with the surrounding community.

LSA has been asked to gather and submit fact-based evidence that the college is fulfilling its
educational mission. As detailed in the attached list of questions distributed by the Provost, the Dean
has asked every academic unit in the college to provide information about how it assesses learning
outcomes. In particular: What specific questions do they think would yield a greater understanding
of learning assessment? Do they have any plans currently in place to accommodate and promote a
dynamic learning environment? A report summarizing best practices across the college will be based
on these responses. Marjorie Horton, Assistant Dean for Undergraduate Education, stressed the need
for all departments to understand the importance of their role in this process. Faculty discussions of
these issues also will serve as an opportunity to clarify the department’s learning goals.

Many instructors rely on the end-of-term course evaluations administered by the Office of
Evaluations &Examinations rather than formulate a plan to assess the learning effectiveness of their
courses. The majority of questions currently included on these forms ask students to assess faculty
performance rather than the effectiveness of the course in teaching the material. In order to gather
meaningful data, specific tools would be required to measure student knowledge at the beginning of
class that would be compared with student knowledge at the end of the term. Mathematics already
has a way to evaluate their gateway courses, i.e. comparing data from initial student placement
exams with scores after completing the course. Another example would be having students read a
single page in another language at the start of classes compared with their performance in reading
the same page after completion of the four-term Language Requirement.

ADMISSIONS

Ted Spencer, Executive Director of Undergraduate Admissions, and Sally Lindsley, Senior
Associate Director, presented an overview of next year’s entering class. Due to the state of the
economy many colleges have expressed concern that fewer students will apply. UM, however, has
seen an increase in the number of applicants, including more international students. An expanded
waitlist contributed to admitting the targeted size of the entering class. As a result of the approval of
Proposal 2 in 2008, Admissions has implemented two important changes in the admissions process:
a much more personalized review of applications; and use of the College Board’s Descriptor Plus
program to increase recruitment of under-represented students. The expanded CSP Summer Bridge
program reflects this broader profile of socio-economic, high school, and family educational
backgrounds.

While the range of SAT scores presented by male and female applicants has not changed,
Admissions has noted a decrease in the number of males who apply. Females tend to have a more
demanding schedule, take more Advanced Placement courses, and participate in a lot of extra-
curricular activities. Perhaps this shift is due to an increased number of male students who choose to
work before continuing their college education. In any case Admissions is working to address this
issue. Spencer presented more general demographics for the 2009 entering class as follows:
     Represent 1667 different high schools from all 50 states and 72 foreign countries
     Have an average G.P.A of 3.8
     15 students attained a perfect score of 1600 on the SAT while 286 students received a
        perfect score of 36 on at least one portion of the ACT
     15% have started their own business
     Close to 75% have participated in civic projects such as Habitat for Humanity
     45% have received an award for community service
     Most students consider diversity as an important factor in college choice


The meeting was adjourned at 5:15 pm.


DISCUSSION: DECEMBER 2, 3-5 PM

SUBCOMMITTEE: JANUARY 13, 3-5 PM
                       Unit Questions about Student Learning Environment


1.   What processes are in place for faculty to discuss whether the curriculum is designed to promote
     students' growth and learning, and to make revisions to the curriculum and program
     requirements?


2.   What are the key ways you expect your students to have grown by the time they complete the
     program (your unit's educational goals)? Such measures of growth could include skills acquired,
     attributes developed, experiences, and "products" that could include course work, artistic work
     and theses.


3.   How is the curriculum/program designed and structured for your students to meet these goals?


4.   In what ways does the unit measure whether students achieve your stated goals? Beyond grades
     and graduation rates, other ways can include portfolios, projects, theses and capstone
     experiences.


5.   How do you communicate your goals (or mission) to students and other constituents, and in what
     ways is the curriculum/program designed to help students achieve them, both on and off campus?
Memorandum


TO:           Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:         Pam Rinker
DATE:         January 21, 2008
SUBJECT:      Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
              December 2, 2008


1.    Curriculum Committee minutes of November 11, 2008 were approved.
2.    The committee accepted the recommendations of the R&E Subcommittee.
3.    December course approval requests were acted upon.
4.    The committee approved a new Academic Minor in Museum Studies.
5.    The committee discussed college policy concerning Independent Studies.
                              LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                 Minutes of December 2, 2008

Present: Evans Young (Acting Chair), Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Angela Dillard, Tim
Dodd, Andrew Fileti, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Tim McKay,
Jennifer Myers, Laura Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Greg Tarlé, Donna Wessel Walker, and
Jeff Wojcik.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of November 11, 2008 were approved.
RACE &ETHNICITY COURSE APPROVALS
The committee accepted the following recommendations as summarized on the attached R&E
Subcommittee Report.

   Approve (6)

       New / Topic Specific

       COMM 478/CAAS 487. Special Topics in Media Culture/Black Media II: Afro-Asian
       Popular Culture. Prof. Robin Coleman. W09.

       Recertification / Blanket

       AMCULT 100. Rethinking American Culture. Lect. Catherine Daligga. W09.

       AMCULT 399. Race, Racism, and Ethnicity. Prof. Matthew Countryman. W09.

       Recertification / Topic Specific

       DUTCH 160. First Year Seminar: Colonialism and its Aftermath. Lect. Ton Broos. W09.

       PORTUG 150. First Year Seminar in Brazilian Studies: Breaking Race & Gender Barriers
       in Brazil. Lect. Niedja Fedrigo. F09.

       RCCORE 100. First Year Seminar: Unteaching Racism. Lect. Helen Fox. W09.

   Defer (1)

       Recertification / Blanket

       PSYCH 310/SOC 320/UC 320. Training Processes for Intergroup Dialogue Facilitation.
       Lecturer Kelly Maxwell. W09.

COURSE APPROVAL ACTIONS
  6. The committee approved 17 modifications and 3 new courses (see Appendix for details).
   7. MUSEUM 301/UC 301 was approved for HU distribution effective F09.
   8. The committee deferred the request to make ECON 101 and/or 102 enforced prerequisites
      rather than advisory for ECON 309, 310, 320, 323, 327, and 330 for the following reasons:

       a. Since almost all students in these classes have already taken ECON 101-102, the proposed
          change from advisory to enforced prerequisites would affect only a very small percentage
          of students and especially disadvantage transfers. The committee recommended that the
          department more clearly define the problem before proposing a solution.
       b. With so many concentrators, Economics has long been grappling with the problem of
          over-enrollment. Typically most spaces in 300-level ECON courses are quickly filled by
          senior concentrators, leaving little room for interested juniors. A more effective tool to
          resolve this problem would be to limit the number of senior concentrators.
       c. According to the supporting statement for these requests, ―Instructors have found that
          students who don’t take ECON 101 and ECON 102 prior to this course are ill-prepared
          and don’t have good results.‖ Since enforced prerequisites are intended to electronically
          block the enrollment of students who lack necessary preparation, the committee asked the
          department to provide the following information:

             i. What specific material in ECON 101 (microeconomics) and 102 (macroeconomics) is
                critical for success in the 300 level courses?
            ii. Since completion of a course does not necessarily reflect student understanding, what
                tools are used to measure learning effectiveness?
           iii. What is the total enrollment in these 300-level courses over several terms, and what
                percentage of those students had already taken ECON 101-102?
           iv. What are the average and median grades for students who had already taken ECON 101
                and 102 compared with those who had not?

NEW ACADEMIC MINORS

As detailed in attached proposal, the committee approved a new Academic Minor in Museum
Studies effective F09.

INDEPENDENT STUDY GUIDELINES
In response to the attached memo from Provost Teresa Sullivan dated August 7, 2006, the committee
first discussed guidelines for independent studies on September 19, 2006 as recorded in the
following excerpt from the minutes:

       Associate Dean Robert Megginson asked for the Curriculum Committee’s input on
       establishing college-wide guidelines for the content, conduct, and grading of independent
       studies, directed reading, and tutorial courses. Faculty members, who represented several
       different departments, noted that they already have policies and forms that require
       documentation of independent studies. Although the format varies, many use a contract-like
       form signed by faculty and student at the beginning of the term and kept on file by the
       department. They strongly objected to being required to complete more paperwork since
       departments do not credit faculty in terms of their teaching load for conducting independent
       studies. The general consensus of the committee was to encourage departments to recognize
       faculty efforts in some way.

       College policy stipulates that ―a combined total 30 credits of Experiential and Directed
       Reading/Independent Study courses may be counted in the 120 credits required for a degree.‖
        In addition most departments limit the number of independent study credits that are allowed to
        count toward concentrations, with none being more than 8. The committee discussed whether
        there should be a maximum number of independent studies that one instructor could conduct
        per year. Opinions varied in this regard, with suggested limits ranging from 3 to 10 per term.
        Another concern was raised as to how many students could be enrolled in an independent
        study, concluding that when one approached the size of a regular class it should be offered as a
        class. In response to a suggestion that all independent studies become mandatory credit/no
        credit, the committee thought that students should be rewarded according to the effort and time
        invested.

        After extended discussion the committee recommended that as a first step in responding to the
        provost’s request, Dean Megginson’s office collect information from departments as to their
        current policies. The results would provide a basis for evaluating what, if any, additional
        college guidelines might be needed. Since the very term ―independent‖ connotes a variety of
        models and traditions, they questioned the wisdom of implementing rigid rules that would be
        difficult to police. Rather, a minimalist approach might be to require that all departments have
        an established policy governing independent studies. College oversight could be applied in
        terms of egregious cases, typically by having ―conversations‖ with individual departmental
        chairs.

Today’s follow-up discussion considered the five suggestions from an email exchange between Dean
Megginson and Christopher Peterson, Prof. of Psychology and member of the curriculum committee
from 2005 to 2008:
       1. Departments should have a written policy for independent study courses that includes
            consensual expectations for the amount of work (reading, writing, grading, and so on)
            and student contact per credit hour.
       2. Before permission to enroll in an independent course is granted by a department,
            students and faculty members planning an independent study course should submit to
            the department a written proposal that describes the course and how it conforms to the
            department's policy.
       3. Faculty members should supervise no more than three independent study courses per
            term unless the department grants an exception. If an exception is granted, then the
            department should forward a copy of the documentation for the independent study
            course described above in 2, along with the reason for the exception, to the LSA
            Curriculum Office.
       4. A student should do no more than one independent study course per semester with the
            same faculty member.
       5. At the end of the semester, the faculty member should submit to the department a copy
            of all work completed by the student for the independent study course.

The committee agreed that the college needs a set of guidelines to require greater accountability with
departments responsible for oversight. When a faculty member is granted an exception, the
department would be required to provide a written memo to the dean’s office stating the rationale.
These documents would be kept on file in case of any future inquiries. Some faculty sponsor a lot of
independent studies, especially involving they involve many students in lab work, which usually is
recorded on student transcripts as experiential credit. In any case, independent studies are incredibly
time consuming and expensive in terms of faculty resources. The committee expressed concern that
faculty receive no compensation or recognition of this effort. They asked if it would be possible to
pursue a change in policy to include this effort in departmental KPIs
Some members were opposed to limiting the number of independent studies that regular faculty
could sponsor each term. Others thought a cap would provide some protection for faculty who
receive multiple requests. The committee’s recommendation was that each department should set a
policy on the maximum number of independent study courses a faculty member may supervise per
term. After reviewing the pedagogical aims of the courses and the burden on individual faculty, a
department would be able to grant an exception. In conclusion to this discussion, the committee
asked Dean Evans Young to redraft the above suggestions for consideration at the next meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm.



NEXT MEETING: JANUARY 20, 3-5 PM
Course Approvals
Memorandum


TO:         Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:       Pam Rinker
DATE:       February 12, 2009
SUBJECT:    Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
            January 20, 2009


1. The minutes of December 2, 2008 were approved.

2.    The recommendations of the R&E Subcommittee were accepted.

3.    Course Approval Requests were acted upon.

4.    The committee considered a draft of the Independent Study Guidelines.

5.    Communication Studies provided an update about admitting concentrators.

6.    Dean Megginson announced the reading assignment for the next committee
      meeting.
                                   LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                      Minutes of January 20, 2009


Present: Bob Megginson (Chair), Robyn Burnham, Ellie Dertz, Angela Dillard, Tim Dodd, Lori Gould, Mika
Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Lauren
Ross, Catherine Sanok, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, Donna Wessel Walker, Robert Wallin, and Evans Young.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

 MINUTES

Minutes of December 2, 2008 were approved.

RACE &ETHNICITY COURSE APPROVALS

The committee accepted the following recommendations as summarized on the attached R&E Subcommittee
Report.
        Approve (2)

             New Proposal / Blanket
             1. HISTORY 244/AAPTIS 244/ MENAS 244/ HJCS 244. The Arab-Jewish Conflict in the
                Middle East, c. 1880 to the Present. Prof. Victor Lieberman. F09.
             Recertification / Blanket
             a. WOMENSTD 270. Gender and the Law: Issues in Race and Ethnicity. Prof. Anna Kirkland. F09.

        Defer (2)

             New / Blanket
             b. ASIAN 332. South Asian Literature and Culture: South Asian Identity, Writing Home from
                Away. Prof. Christi Merrill. W09.
             Recertification / Blanket
             c. PSYCH 310/SOC 320/UC 320. Training Processes for Intergroup Dialogue Facilitation.
                 Lecturer Kelly Maxwell. W09.

LSA COURSE APPROVALS

The committee approved a total of 81 courses approval requests: 1 deletion, 69 modifications, and 11 new
proposals. (See Course Approval Appendix for a summary.)

    1. A total of 11 of the 69 modifications were given contingent approved: ECON 309, 310, 320,
       323, 327, 330, 340, 360, 380, 395, and 398. The contingency is the department’s agreement to
       implement the committee’s decision to include only ECON 101 in the enforced prerequisites
       effective F09. The committee deferred the request to add ECON 102 to the enforced
       prerequisites beginning F09. The department was invited to resubmit this course approval
       request next year after reviewing changes in student performance as a result of enforcing only
       ECON 101.

    2. For courses currently including ―ECON 101 & 102‖ as advisory prerequisites, the committee
       approved a modification to ―ECON 102 (unless ECON 101 completed with B or higher).‖

    3. A request to approve HU distribution for MUSICOL 111 was deferred due to insufficient
       information. While the committee agreed that the topics of the course address historical and
        theoretical issues, they thought the specific content and format focused more on music itself
        and its application. LSA distribution courses entail greater emphasis on the cultural aspects
        and tools used in the Humanities discipline, as well as formal writing assignments that require
        academic analysis of the material. If the Music School wants to resubmit this request, the
        committee suggested replacing one or two of the exams with written papers. A more detailed
        rationale for the distribution request would be needed.

    4. The committee deferred a new course proposal for CMPLXSYS 470/PHYSICS 470.
       According to the course approval request form, this lab class would meet only 4 hours each
       week, while college policy requires that labs must meet 2 hours weekly for each credit earned.
       As submitted, this course would earn only 2 credits rather than 3 as requested. The department
       is considering how to resolve this issue in view of teaching assignments.

Distribution Approvals
    1. SAC 308, ―Screenwriting for Non-Majors,‖ was approved for CE distribution effective F09.

    2. Removal of NS distribution from GEOSCI 208 was approved effective F09. Because this course
       is regularly scheduled as a meet-together with GEOSCI 497 (UG/Grad credit), GEOSCI 208 no
       longer meets distribution guidelines.

INDEPENDENT STUDY GUIDELINES

As a follow-up to the prior discussion on December 2, 1008, the committee considered the attached revised
guidelines submitted by Assistant Dean Evans Young. They recommended several changes and refinements.
They planned to review another revision the following week.

UPDATE ON ADMISSION POLICY FOR COMMUNICATION CONCENTRATORS

At the request of Associate Dean Bob Megginson, the attached update as to the current policies and
practices used to admit concentrators was sent to the committee by Susan Douglas, Chair of
Communication Studies. This memo records several incremental changes never officially approved
by the Curriculum Committee.

MATTERS ARISING

Dean Megginson announced two topics for next week’s discussion: 1) Chapter 9, ―Preparing for a Global
Society,‖ pages 225-254 of Our Underachieving Colleges by Derek Bok; and 2) the issues resulting from
faculty who schedule final exams on the last day of classes.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm.

NEXT MEETING: JANUARY 27, 3-5 PM
Discussion
Memorandum


TO:           Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:         Pam Rinker
DATE:         February 12, 2009
SUBJECT:      Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
              January 27, 2009


1. The minutes of January 20, 2008 were approved as amended.

2.    The committee discussed difficulties associated with scheduling final exams on the
      last day of classes.

3.    The committee approved the final draft of LSA Guidelines for Independent
      Study Courses for submission to the Executive Committee

4.    The committee discussed Chapter 9, ―Preparing for a Global Society,‖ in Derek
      Bok’s Our Underachieving Colleges.
                               LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                  Minutes of January 27, 2009


Present: Evans Young, Acting Chair, Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Ellie Dertz, Tim Dodd, Lori
Gould, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Esrold Nurse,
Laura Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Lauren Ross, Catherine Sanok, Robert Wallin, and Donna
Wessel Walker.

Guest: Kortney Briske, Associate University Registrar.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of January 20, 2009 were approved as amended.

SCHEDULING FINAL EXAMS ON THE LAST DAY OF CLASS

The committee discussed difficulties associated with scheduling final exams on the last day of classes
rather than waiting for time designated by the Office of the Registrar. They noted that two university
policies make the Fall academic calendar especially tight: beginning classes after Labor Day; and
having a two-day Fall Study Break in October. Many faculty and students seem to prefer scheduling
exams early in order to extend their holidays. Many students complain about the limited number of
days between Fall and Winter terms, especially those from other countries or have to travel greater
distances. A common practice seems to be that instructors ask their class to vote about taking the final
on the last day of class. Many students quickly agree without considering the consequences on their
other classes. Many students who disagree feel pressured to comply with the majority. As a result,
multiple exams can be scheduled within a few days in addition to the final papers due on the last day of
class. Perhaps student performance and grades could improve with the addition of one or two study
days before the exam period. The Office of the Registrar distributes the following policy:
    The Final Examination Period and Study Days are determined by the University Calendar
    Committee and approved by the Regents. No allowance is made and no approval is given by the
    Final Examination Committee for final examinations prior to the Final Examination Schedule.
    Approval will not be given for any examinations during Study Days. Final examinations
    scheduled for one date and time within the Final Examination Period may not be moved to
    another date within the Final Examination Period without prior approval of the Final
    Examination Committee. Conflicts with regard to the published schedule will be reviewed by the
    Final Examination Committee. A written request is to be filed with the chairperson, Paul
    Robinson, University Registrar, 1210 LSA, no later than two weeks prior to the beginning of the
    Final Examination Period.
The LSA Faculty Code includes a very similar policy under Article IV. It allows an individual
student and the instructor to agree in advance on an alternate exam time. The faculty code also
requires an instructor to provide a make-up exam time to a student who presents a satisfactory
excuse for an unavoidable absence.
    Final Examinations
    All students shall be required to take the final examinations in every course they have elected in
    which a final examination is given.
    The official examination schedule shall be followed; an instructor may not depart from the
    official schedule unless prior approval of the University Committee on Examinations is
    obtained.
    All students are expected to take their final examinations at the time fixed in the official schedule
    of examinations. No single student may be examined at a time earlier or later than the official time
    unless a mutually agreeable time has been arranged in advance by the student and the instructor. (B
    4.01)
    Absence from Final
    Instructors shall report to the Registrar all absences from final examinations.
    A student who is unavoidably absent from a final examination may, upon presentation of an
    excuse satisfactory to the instructor, be granted the privilege of making up the examination
    within the first four weeks of the next Fall or Winter term in residence. (B 4.02)
    Number and Duration of Examinations
    Examinations shall be scheduled at the rate of four examinations a day; each examination period
    shall be two hours in length, but each department (or instructor) shall have the authority to
    determine the length of time for each examination within the two hour period. (B 4.03)

The committee recognized that this is a very complex issue. In fact the university determines the
academic schedule for each term about five years in advance. They voiced several concerns and
possible ways to address this issue. Some thought that the exam period stretches out over too many
days and asked if they be compressed. It would be informative if the university collected and
evaluated data as to how many faculty do give final exams. Kortney Briske, Associate University
Registrar, reported that the Provost has asked the Registrar’s Office and all faculty to consider this
problem. The LSA Deans also have instructed chairs and directors to make inquiries within their
units. In conclusion the committee urged more communication and open discussion about the
problems the current system imposes on both faculty and students.

INDEPENDENT STUDY GUIDELINES

Assistant Dean Evans Young submitted the attached revised draft of LSA Guidelines for
Independent Study Courses, which was approved for submission to the Executive Committee. The
final document is shorter and less restrictive than the draft discussed the previous week, while
stipulating that departments keep related documents on file in case of future inquiries. While some
academic units already practice such a policy, the implementation of these guidelines would make
clear that LSA expects each department to publicly post a written statement of policies including: the
maximum number of independent studies an individual faculty can teach per term; a form that must
be signed by faculty and student stating the required work; and sufficient evidence of work
submitted by a student to fulfill this agreement. The department would be responsible for
communicating, implementing, and enforcing its policy. Faculty commented that the type of
independent studies supervised by each department depends on its primary discipline (Humanities,
Natural Science, or Social Science). The college’s overall goal is to provide more opportunities for
students to engage in internships, field practicums, and active faculty research that are so valuable
for effective learning. Faculty expressed concerns, however, that more rules might have the
unintended consequence of discouraging faculty from engaging in such activities. The issue as to
how faculty could be credited for the significant effort required to supervise independent studies has
not been resolved.
PREPARING FOR A GLOBAL SOCIETY

The committee discussed Chapter 9, ―Preparing for a Global Society,‖ in Derek Bok’s Our
Underachieving Colleges. Some members thought that Bok expects too much of higher education,
that this type of learning about the world must begin at the elementary school level. They saw a
mismatch between the goal of preparing ―global citizens‖ and Bok’s suggested remedies.

Others on the committee argued that it is impossible to condense citizen preparation for a global
society into four years of college, but thought LSA students would gain from more intensive
language courses, especially those that strengthen conversational skills. LSA study abroad
opportunities should be extended to all students, including those who lack sufficient economic
resources. It is important to clarify how courses taken abroad will count toward LSA requirements.

A college culture that provides rich curricular and co-curricular resources for language study should
be developed. The committee pointed out that LSA already makes a great number of opportunities
available. They suggested that LSA identify and publicize the courses considered as ―Global
Education.‖ It was also suggested that it would be valuable to offer courses that look at the United
States from the perspective of others outside the U.S.


The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.


Next Meeting: SUBCOMMITTEES
FEBRUARY 3, 3-5 PM


NEXT FULL MEETING: FEBRUARY 10, 3-5 PM
Course Approvals
Memorandum


 TO:           Members of the LSA Executive Committee
 FROM:         Pam Rinker
 DATE:         March 2, 2009
 SUBJECT:      Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
               February 10, 2009


1. The minutes of January 27, 2009 were approved.

 2.    The committee acted on course approval requests.

 3.    The committee considered course approval requests submitted by the School of
       Art & Design and a proposed new Academic Minor in Art & Design.
                              LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                 Minutes of February 10, 2009


Present: Evans Young (Acting Chair), Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Ellie Dertz, Angela
Dillard, Tim Dodd, Lori Gould, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Jennifer
Myers, Laura Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Lauren Ross, Catherine Sanok, Naomi Silver,
Greg Tarlé, Donna Wessel Walker, and Robert Wallin.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of January 27, 2009 were approved.

LSA COURSE APPROVAL REQUESTS

The committee approved a total of 83 course approval requests: 9 deletions, 42 modifications and 32
new courses (see Course Approval Appendix for a complete listing).
   1. Eleven courses were approved for HU distribution: ASIAN 210/HISTORY 219, The
       Philippines, Culture and History; ASIAN 360, Taoism--Historical and Contemporary
       Incarnations; ASIAN 367/LING 367, Languages of Asia; CLCIV 330, Homeric Greece;
       COMPLIT 322, Translating World Literatures; GERMAN 386, Fairy Tales; HONORS 351,
       Honors Introduction to Research in the Humanities; ITALIAN 270, Italian Literature and
       Culture; RUSSIAN 365, Russian Fantasy and Science Fiction; RUSSIAN 382 (was 482),
       Masterpieces of Russian Literature; SLAVIC 290, Studies in Eastern European Cultures.
   2. Two courses were approved for ID distribution: ENVIRON 270, Our Common Future:
       Ecology, Economics & Ethics of Sustainable Development; and HISTORY 368/AMCULT
       342/WOMENSTD 360, History of the Family in the U.S. (replacing SS distribution).
   3. Five courses were approved for NS distribution and/or Bachelor of Science Eligibility:
       BIOLOGY 125, Biotechnology and Society; BIOPHYS 440/CHEM 440, Biophysics of
       Diseases (BS); CMPLXSYS 470/PHYSICS 470, Experiments in Nonlinear Dynamics (BS);
       HONORS 352, Honors Introduction to Research in the Natural Sciences (NS/BS).
   4. Two courses were approved for SS distribution: ANTHRCUL 327/RCSSCI 327, Critical
       Theory in Medicine and Healing; HONORS 350, Honors Introduction to Research in the
       Social Sciences.

One course was deferred pending discussion with the department: GEOSCI 108, When Earth
Attacks, The Science behind Natural Disasters, a new 1-credit mini-course satisfying NS
distribution.



SCHOOL OF ART & DESIGN COURSE APPROVAL REQUESTS
As requested by the School of Art & Design, the committee approved CE distribution for a series
of 11 new studio courses for non-majors: ARTDES 101, Printmaking for Non-Majors; ARTDES 102,
Painting for Non-Majors; ARTDES 103, Digital Photography for Non-Majors; ARTDES 104,
Watercolor for Non-Majors; ARTDES 105, Life Drawing for Non-Majors; ARTDES 106, Graphic
Imaging for Non-Majors; ARTDES 107, Metals for Non-Majors; ARTDES 108, Animation for Non-
Majors; ARTDES 109, Sculpture for Non-Majors; ARTDES 111, Clay for Non-Majors; and ARTDES
112,Wood for Non-Majors.

The committee deferred a request that the above courses and 5 others already approved for CE
distribution earn LSA credit toward degree: ARTDES 100, Drawing Studio; ARTDES 110, Digital
Studio; ARTDES 220, Tools, Materials, and Processes III: Time; ARTDES 230, Concept, Form, and
Context II: Culture; and ARTDES 231, Concept, Form, and Context I: Nature.
The committee invited Mary Schmidt, Associate Dean of the School of Art & Design, to attend the
next meeting for a discussion about the new Academic Minor in Art & Design.


The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.
NEXT MEETING: FEBRUARY 17, 1:30-3 PM
       Joint Discussion with College of Engineering Curriculum Committee
       GM Room Fourth Floor, Lurie Center

NO MEETING: FEBRUARY 24
Winter Break

SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS: MARCH 3
Memorandum

TO:            Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:          Pam Rinker
DATE:          March 16, 2009
SUBJECT:       Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
               February 17, 2009


  1. Members of the Curriculum Committees from both LSA and Engineering
     discussed possible changes in the content of Math 215.
  2. Brian Gilchrist, Professor in AOOS and EECS, presented their efforts to create a
     new academic minor in Multidisciplinary Design (MD).
  3. Susan Montgomery raised questions about PHYSICS 240 as the LSA course most
     often transferred to Engineering.
  4. Toby Teorey briefly reported their continuing problems in identifying which
     LSA courses would satisfy the HU or SS distribution for their students.
                             LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
             Joint Meeting with the College of Engineering Curriculum Committee
                                 Minutes of February 17, 2009

PRESENT
LSA: Bob Megginson, Chair, Tim Dodd, Lori Gould, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Jennifer
Myers, Laura Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Lauren Ross, Catherine Sanok, Naomi Silver, Greg
Tarle, Robert Wallin, and Donna Wessel Walker.
Engineering: Toby Teorey, Chair/EECS; John Barker, AOSS; Luis Bernal, Aerospace Engineering;
Marina Epelman, Industrial and Operations Engineering; John Everett, Civil and Environmental
Engineering; James Holloway, Associate Dean; Alan Hunt, Biomedical Engineering; Eric
Jankowski, Graduate Student in Chemical Engineering; Ed Larsen, Nuclear Engineering and
Radiological Sciences; Susan Montgomery, Chemical Engineering; Anastassios Perakis, Naval
Architecture and Marine Engineering; Richard Robertson, Materials Science and Engineering; Fred
Ward, Technical Communication; and Judy Wolfe, Student Affairs.
Guests: Karen Rhea and Alejandro Uribe, Mathematics
The meeting came to order at 1:30 pm.

MINUTES
Minutes of February 10, 2009 were approved.

POSSIBLE CHANGES IN CONTENT OF MATH 215
MATH 215 currently includes a five-week section on vector calculus (see attached). The department
is considering moving that section to another course, possibly MATH 450, and replacing it with an
introduction to linear algebra. An email to 1600 students indicated that not many LSA students need
the vector analysis content. Faculty Alejandro Uribe and Karen Rhea from Mathematics were
present to request feedback about how this change might affect Engineering students. Faculty
members of their Curriculum Committee thought it would be a big loss for students in Chemical and
Engineering students who need both linear and vector analysis. Math will include this feedback in
considering any changes.
There was also some discussion about MATH 115 and 116, gateway courses that are more skill-
based. In view of the fact that current students rely so much on calculators for problem solving, LSA
and Engineering consider it important that students learn the steps to figure out the solutions by
hand. They invited ideas to address their experience that many students soon ―forget‖ how to solve
problems without a calculator. Faculty from both colleges agreed that they would be better prepared
if they were reminded at the beginning of their junior year about the importance of reviewing the
mathematical skills taught in MATH 115 and 116.

NEW ACADEMIC MINOR IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN (MD)
Brian Gilchrist, Professor in AOOS and EECS, used a PowerPoint presentation about the current
progress to develop a new 15-credit minor in Multidisciplinary Design (see attachments). Engineering
students would collaborate with interested representatives enrolled in other schools. Faculty would
sponsor individuals or groups in designing technology systems. Faculty developing the minor still need
to consult with colleagues in other departments and colleges as to their willingness to help sponsor
these multi-year projects. Some interest has been voiced in developing a similar minor in LSA, but any
engineering credits would be included in the maximum of 20 non-LSA credits.

PHYSICS CURRICULUM
Susan Montgomery raised questions about PHYSICS 240, the LSA course most often transferred to
Engineering. The experience of their faculty is that students having completed PHYSICS 240 were not
prepared for advanced courses compared with students who took the Engineering equivalent. One
concern is the practice of grading some Physics exams on the curve. Balancing conceptual content with
the application of them is always a challenge in science courses. Prof. Greg Tarle reported that Physics
has been working on the issues concerning PHYSICS 240. One change has been to improve the
associated lab, PHYSICS 241. Faculty from both colleges who met to discuss these issues found their
exchange very beneficial to everyone.

ENGINEERING’S DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENT
Toby Teorey briefly reported that Engineering continues to have problems in identifying which LSA
courses would satisfy the HU or SS distribution for their students. He thinks it would be very helpful
to provide advisors with a list for each. Engineering will continue their efforts.

The meeting was adjourned at 3 pm

NEXT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING: MARCH 3, 3-5 PM
NEXT FULL MEETING: MARCH 10, 3-5 PM
      COURSE APPROVALS
Memorandum



   TO:            Members of the LSA Executive Committee
   FROM:          Pam Rinker
   DATE:          April 1, 2009
   SUBJECT:       Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
                  March 10, 2009


    1.     The minutes of February 17, 2009 were approved.
    2.     Recommendations of the R&E Subcommittee were accepted.
    3.     The committee approved a total of 69 course approval requests: 6 deletions; 50
           modifications; and 13 new proposals.
    4.     The committee approved a new concentration in International Studies pending review by
           the President’s Council.
    5.     The committee approved modifications for twelve concentrations.
    6.     The committee deferred modifications for three concentrations.
    7.     The committee approved modifications for seven academic minors.
    8.     The committee approved two new academic minors:
           a. Cultures and Literatures of Eastern Europe
           b. Ukrainian Language, Literature, and Culture
                               LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                   Minutes of March 10, 2009


Present: Bob Megginson (Chair), Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Ellie Dertz, Angela Dillard, Tim
Dodd, Lori Gould, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Adam McFarland, Tim Mc Kay, Jennifer Myers, Laura Olsen,
JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Lauren Ross, Greg Tarlé, Donna Wessel Walker, Robert Wallin, and Evans
Young.

Visitors: Ken Kollman and Folake Graves.

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of February 17, 2009 were approved.

R&E PROPOSALS

The committee accepted the R&E Subcommittee’s recommendations to approve 3 proposals:
   New Proposal / Blanket
       1. AMCULT 311. Race and Mixed Race: Issues in Race and Ethnicity. Assistant Professor
           Evelyn Alsultany. F09.
       2. ASIAN 332. South Asian Literature and Culture: South Asian Identity, Writing Home
            from Away. Professor Christi Merrill. W09.
    Recertification / Blanket
       3. PSYCH 310/SOC 320/UC 320. Training Processes for Intergroup Dialogue
            Facilitation. Lecturer Kelly Maxwell. W09.

LSA COURSE APPROVAL REQUESTS

The Curriculum Committee approved a total of 69 requests: 6 deletions, 50 modifications, and 13
new proposals (see Course Approval Appendix for a complete listing).
   5. Two courses were approved for HU distribution: RUSSIAN 360, Emigré Literature: Nabokov
       (renumbered from RUSSIAN 453); and WOMENSTD 354/CAAS 254/HONORS
       354/RCHUMS 354, Race and Identity in Music (renumbered from WOMENSTD 444/CAAS
       445).
    6. One mini-course was approved for NS distribution and BS Eligibility: GEOSCI 108, When
       Earth Attacks: The Science behind Natural Disasters.

INTERNATIONAL STUDIES CONCENTRATION
The committee invited Ken Kollman, Director of CICS, and Folake Graves, Student Services
Coordinator, to discuss a proposed concentration in International Studies. The attached
documentation indicates the center’s effort to address the committee’s earlier feedback. The
committee expressed concern that requiring the director to approve all course elections prior to
enrollment will result in an administrative bottleneck for students. When International Studies
concentrators have late registration appointments, advisors must help them identify alternatives to
courses that are closed. It also would be helpful to help students identify topics courses that could
deepen or broaden knowledge in related areas. The committee inquired about the overlap of Track 1
with the Political Science concentration, but a closer look revealed important differences between
the two.

Asked who would teach the three core courses in the IS concentration, Prof. Kollman explained the
center’s plan to borrow or ―buy‖ the services of faculty from other departments on a three-year
cycle. As to the committee’s concern about the required 6-term language proficiency, Prof. Kollman
indicated their willingness to accept a 4 + 2 plan for students who have a strong rationale.
Requesting help from departmental advisors in identifying departmental courses of interest seems
unlikely since most advisors are overloaded serving their own concentrators. After a lively
discussion, the committee approved the International Studies Concentration pending review by the
LSA Executive Committee. As a new program, CICS also must seek approval by the President’s
Council.

CONCENTRATION MODIFICATIONS (see attached proposals for details)
The committee approved modifications to the following concentrations:
        Computer Science
        Evolutionary Anthropology
        History of Art
        Informatics
        Interdisciplinary Physics
        Linguistics
        Mathematical Sciences
        Organizational Studies
        Physics
        Russian
        Screen Arts and Culture Sub-Concentration
        Statistics

The committee deferred the request from Judaic Studies to modify language prerequisite for their
concentration. They asked the department to rephrase and clarify the proposal as well as list the
―other programs/departments in the Humanities‖ used as their comparison group. They requested
clarification about what is meant by the modification means and the comparison group used in
reference to ―language prerequisites of other programs/departments in the Humanities.‖
The committee deferred modifications to the BBCS and Psychology concentrations. First, the
committee suggested renaming the following groups so that students could understand the primary
focus of each. Psychology has agreed to make this change.

        BBCS Gateway Courses                                 Suggested Names
        Group I Psych 230 or 335                             Biopsychology
        Group II Psych 240 or 345                            Cognitive Psychology
        Group III Psych 250, 260, 270, 280, or 290           Psychology as a Social Science

        Psychology Breadth Requirement                       Suggested Names
        Group A Psych 230 or 240                             Biopsychology / Cognitive Psychology
        Group B Psych 250 or 270                             Developmental / Psychopathology
        Group C Psych 260, 280, or 290                       Organizational / Social / Personality
Second, the committee was concerned about the department’s request to change the method of
calculating concentration GPAs. LSA’s general policy is stated clearly in the Faculty Code and the
LSA Bulletin (item 9 under Concentration policies): ―A student must earn an overall GPA of at least
2.0 in courses taken in the field of concentration. This includes all courses taken in the department of
concentration (prerequisites, required courses, and electives) and any required cognates. Exceptions
for specific concentrations are in Chapter VI.‖

The only exceptions approved up to this point were in Biology and Chemistry. Their concentration
GPA includes all prerequisites, including those taken outside the department of concentration. That
means that the exceptions include more courses in the GPA calculation rather than less. The
committee must consider a key question: What circumstances are sufficient to warrant an exception
to the general policy on concentration GPA calculation? Specifically, do the BBCS and Psychology
concentrations differ enough to warrant excluding ―extra‖ Psychology courses from the calculation
of the BBCS concentration GPA?
Psychology also asked the committee to affirm their current practice of not allowing students to
double concentrate in BBCS and Psychology. The stated reason is that the two programs are very
similar and share a majority of their courses. While this practice seems appropriate, it contradicts the
department’s statement that the character of the BBCS concentration is different enough to warrant
an adjustment in the concentration GPA calculation. For most concentrations, the college views all
departmental courses as sufficiently related to be factored into the concentration GPA. Certain
interdisciplinary/interdepartmental programs, such as Neuroscience, Organization Studies, and
Evolutionary Anthropology, calculate the concentration GPA using only courses that complete the
concentration requirements. In these cases it is impossible to distinguish between departmental
courses that are ―closely related‖ from those that are only ―somewhat‖ related.

ACADEMIC MINORS (see attached proposals for details)
The committee approved new Academic Minors in Cultures & Literatures of Eastern Europe
and Ukrainian Language, Literature, and Culture. They also approved modifications to the
following academic minors:
        Applied Statistics
        LGBTQ & Sexuality Studies
        Mathematics
        Medical Anthropology
        Physics
        Russian Language, Literature, & Culture
        Scandinavian Minor

The meeting was adjourned at 5:10 pm.
NEXT MEETING: MARCH 17, 3-5 PM
       Discussion

SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS: MARCH 24
Memorandum



       TO:           Members of the LSA Executive Committee
       FROM:         Pam Rinker
       DATE:         April 1, 2009
       SUBJECT:      Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
                     March 31, 2009


  1.     The minutes of March 10, 2009 were approved.
  2.     Recommendations of the R&E Subcommittee were accepted.
  3.     The committee approved a total of 18 course approval requests: 2 deletions; 10 modifications;
         and 6 new proposals.
  4.     The committee discussed the role of writing in course proposals.
  5.     The committee approved modifications for three concentrations: Computer Science, Judaic
         Studies, and Psychology.
  6.     The committee approved modifications for Psychology’s Brain, Behavior, and Cognitive
         Science (BBCS) with one exception.
  7.     The committee approved SS distribution for the School of Public Health’s HMP 200 (Health,
         Management, and Policy) for one term only.
                                LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                    Minutes of March 31, 2009


Present: Bob Megginson (Chair), Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Ellie Dertz, Angela Dillard, Lori
Gould, Meghan Madison, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Adam McFarland, Jennifer Myers, Laura Olsen, Pam
Rinker, Lauren Ross, Catherine Sanok, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, and Bob Wallin.

The meeting came to order at 3:15 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of March 10, 2009 were approved.

R&E PROPOSALS

The committee accepted the R&E Subcommittee’s recommendation to approve the following course:
New Proposal / Topic Specific

    ARTDES 303/ AMCULT 405/ CAAS 458. So Called: Mixed Race and Multi-Ethnic Identity.
    Professor Edward West. F09.

LSA COURSE APPROVAL REQUESTS

The Curriculum Committee approved a total of 18 requests: 2 deletions, 10 modifications, and 6 new
courses (see Course Approval Appendix for a complete listing).

    1. Two courses were approved for HU distribution: AMCULT 250, American Magazines; and
       CLCIV 293, Applied Ethics in the Ancient World.
    2. WOMENSTD 257, Special Topics in the Social Sciences, was approved for SS
       distribution.
    3. SOC 312, The Evaluation of Evidence in Sociology, was approved as a new course satisfying
       the QR/1 requirement

THE ROLE OF WRITING IN COURSE PROPOSALS

Dean Megginson presented the attached draft about the role of writing in course proposals, especially
the ones that include a distribution request. Everyone agreed that this was an important issue, but
recommended some revisions. The document needs to recognize that there are many different types
of writing and ways of incorporating this learning tool into a course proposal. Factors may include
the instructor’s goals, his or her discipline and educational background, and the specific material
being presented. They also wanted to make clear that the stated quantity and style of writing are
meant as suggestions rather than rules. They wanted to communicate to faculty that the statement is
intended to invite a conversation about their rationale for using writing in differently. The committee
agreed to return to this discussion next Fall term.

CONCENTRATION MODIFICATIONS
The committee approved modifications to three following concentrations:

    1. Computer Science: Modify required pre-concentration courses from MATH 115, MATH
       116, MATH 215, EECS 203, and EECS 280 to EECS 203, EECS 280, MATH 115, MATH
       116, and one of MATH 214, MATH 215, or MATH 216.
    2. Judaic Studies: Reduce the language pre-requisite to one year. See attached rationale.
    3. Psychology: See attached proposal for details.

The committee approved the attached modifications to the Brain, Behavior, and Cognitive Science
(BBCS) concentration except for not including Psychology courses in calculating a concentrator’s
GPA. The committee noted that all departments have to deal with students who take easier courses to
increase their concentration GPA. Nor were they convinced by Psychology’s rationale, especially
when approval would set a new precedent in the college. The committee suggested a simple solution
that is used by several departments: adding a concentration requirement that ―No course will count
toward the concentration unless the student receives a grade of C- or better.‖ That would discourage
students from taking easier Psychology courses while at the same time motivate them to perform better
in their BBCS courses. If the department agrees, adding this rule to the concentration requirement
would be considered approved.

SS DISTRIBUTION REQUESTED FOR A NON-LSA COURSE
The School of Public Health requested SS distribution for HMP 200 (Health, Management and
Policy) as their first undergraduate course. Distribution approval automatically confers LSA credit.
The committee recognized that such a course would be very popular to LSA students interested in
Public Health. Also, HMP 200 is along the lines of other non-LSA courses that offer a broad
introduction to a field outside of LSA (see attached list). As a distribution course, however, the
committee recommended a third writing assignment which could take various forms. They were also
concerned that the School of Public Health has no experience with undergraduates or LSA’s rigorous
academic expectations.
The committee asked Jennifer Meyers, Associate Director of the Residential College, to contact
Public Health about these issues. Because of her extensive experience in working with
undergraduates, the committee thought she would be an excellent consultant in improving this course
(revised proposal attached). According to Jennifer, Public Health had actually approached RC a few
years ago about jointly offering such a course. Since those staff members are no longer at Public
Health, it would be worth reopening that conversation for Fall 2010.

The committee approved SS distribution for one term only. Approval would be made indefinite
assuming the above issues can be resolved. Based on the committee’s feedback and conversation with
Jennifer Meyers, public health plans to send a revised proposal early next week.
The meeting was adjourned at 5 pm.

DISCUSSION MEETING: APRIL 7, 3-5 PM
Memorandum


TO:           Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:         Pam Rinker
DATE:         April 15, 2009
SUBJECT:      Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
              April 7, 2009


  1. The minutes of March 31, 2009 were approved.

  2. Sandra Gregerman and Patricia Gurin summarized their current efforts to engage
     undergraduates and faculty in research and teaching.

  3. The Curriculum Committee accepted the nominee, which will be presented to the
     LSA Executive Committee for official approval.

  4. The committee acted upon course approval requests.

  5. The committee approved changes to the Modern Greek Concentration and the
     Academic Minor Chemical Physics.

  6. Phil Gorman requested discussion and feedback about Using Concentration
     Courses to Satisfy Distribution Requirements
Memorandum


TO:            Members of the LSA Executive Committee
FROM:          Pam Rinker
DATE:          April 15, 2009
SUBJECT:       Summary of LSA Curriculum Committee Minutes
               April 14, 2009


  1. The minutes of April 7, 2009 were approved.

  2. Course approval requests were acted upon.

  3. The Curriculum Committee recommended approval of a new Graduate
     Certificate in Latina/o Studies contingent on American Culture agreeing to a few
     changes.

  4. The committee approved an update of short descriptions.

  5. The committee reviewed the attached summary of their activities this past year.

  6. Dean Megginson expressed his appreciation to all who contributed to the success
     of this year’s committee and especially acknowledged Laura Olsen and Greg
     Tarlé for completing their three-year commitment as elected faculty.
                                LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE
                                    Minutes of April 14, 2009


Present: Bob Megginson, Chair, Robyn Burnham, Jennifer Crocker, Ellie Dertz, Angela Dillard, Tim
Dodd, Lori Gould, Mika Lavaque-Manty, Megan Madison, Adam McFarland, Tim McKay, Jennifer
Myers, Laura Olsen, JoAnn Peraino, Pam Rinker, Naomi Silver, Greg Tarlé, Robert Wallin, and Evans
Young

The meeting came to order at 3:10 pm.

MINUTES

Minutes of April 7, 2009 were approved.

COURSE APPROVAL REQUESTS (see attached report for details)

    1. The committee approved three course modifications.
    2. The committee approved one new course: CAAS 346/ENGLISH 389/HISTORY 362,
       Literature in African History, as fulfilling the HU distribution.

NEW GRADUATE CERTIFICATE IN LATINA/O STUDIES

The attached new Graduate Certificate in Latina/o Studies was reviewed by an ad hoc subcommittee
(Bob Megginson, Jennifer Crocker, Cathy Conway-Perrin, Robyn Burnham, Naomi Silver, and Megan
Madison). As summarized in the attached report, they agreed that the quality of the proposal was
good, but the requirement fell short of the 15-credit minimum required by Rackham. If American
Culture agrees to increase the credit hours to at least15, of which at least nine are not double-
counted, the subcommittee recommended approval. This would bring the certificate into line with
Rackham and LSA policy. The committee as a whole agreed with these recommendations. A
concern was raised about a sentence in the proposal stating that individual students may be required
to complete ―additional‖ work. Several committee members offered different interpretations of this
reference, which served as evidence that American Culture needs to clarify their intent. Dean
Megginson will send the proposal and the attached subcommittee report to the Executive Committee
for consideration.

UPDATING SHORT COURSE DESCRIPTIONS

Over 1500 courses in Pathways currently lack short descriptions, which provided information for four
important resources:

    1.   Public UM Course Catalogue
    2.   Online LSA Bulletin
    3.   Online LSA Course Guide when no class information is entered
    4.   Transfer equivalencies for credit evaluators here and at other colleges

All departments and programs had access to an online database to review their course descriptions and
choose one of three options: 1) use the existing course description in Pathways; 2) use the description
in the LSA database (last updated 2005); or 3) provide a new or revised description. The existing
description in Pathways was the primary default for courses without a choice indicated. The
description in the LSA database served as a secondary default.

An ad hoc subcommittee (Pam Rinker, Angela Dillard, Lori Gould, Megan Madison, Greg Tarlé,
and Bob Wallin) reviewed all active undergraduate and graduate descriptions. The goals were to edit
and correct grammatical errors, change all future tense to present as the accepted practice, and
shorten descriptions well over the limit of 50-75 words. The Curriculum Committee approved the
130-page Excel file listing almost 1750 courses. The Registrar’s Office has agreed to do a batch
upload of these updated descriptions all effective Fall 2009. In reflecting on the process, the
committee saw a need for departments to evaluate their overall curriculum and assess the need for
changes.

A second recommendation stemming from the review of descriptions was to officially delete courses
that have not been taught in at least four years, designated as inactive in the LSA Bulletin. In the next
few weeks the Dean’s Office will send a list of inactive courses to academic units, asking them to
submit notification of any they do not want to delete. A list of all other inactive courses will be sent
to the Registrar’s Office for deletion effective Fall 2009.

CURRICULUM COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

After reviewing the attached summary of the committee’s activities this past year, Dean Megginson
thanked everyone for their hard work. Serving on the LSA Curriculum Committee demands
significant time and effort. He thanked the four LSA Student Government appointees whose input
has been very helpful. He also thanked Assistant Dean Evans Young and Curriculum Specialist Pam
Rinker for their valuable contributions. Finally Dean Megginson acknowledged Laura Olsen and
Greg Tarlé who are completing their three-year commitment as elected faculty.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 pm.

NEXT MEETING

    Subcommittees
    September 8, 3-5 pm


NEXT FULL MEETING

    Introductions and Course Approvals
    September 15, 3-5 pm
SUMMARY OF LSA CURRICULUM COMMITTEE ACTIVITY 2007-2008

                                            2007-08              2006-07
 Total Course Approval Actions:                556                 571
 Deletions                                      53                 109
 Modifications                                 251                 328
 New Proposals                                 125                  119
 LSA credit for Non-LSA courses                  9                    0

 Distribution/Requirement Approvals            : 59                 69
 Creative Expression (CE)                        6                   0
 Humanities (HU)                               27                   21
 Interdisciplinary (ID)                          4                    2
 Natural Science (NS)                            3                  12
 MSA/QR1                                         1                    0
 NS/QR2                                          0                    2
 Social Science (SS)                             6                    9
 BS Eligibility                                12                   22

 Race & Ethnicity Course Approvals:            25                   33
 New Courses                                   10                   11
 Recertifications                               9                   13
 Deferrals                                      3                    8
 Conversions (topic-specific to blanket)        3                    1

 Concentration Proposals                       25                   15

 New (2)                                      Creative Writing (English Sub-
 Informatics                                  Concentration)
 Romance Language and Literature           Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
                                           English Honors
 Modifications (23)                        English with Teaching Certificate
 Afroamerican and African Studies          Environment
 Anthropology Zoology (renamed             General Biology
 Evolutionary Anthropology)                History of Art
 Asian Languages and Cultures              Italian
 Biology                                   Latin American & Caribbean Studies
 Biomedical Engineering                    Microbiology
 Brain, Behavior and Cognitive             Organizational Studies
 Science                                   Plant Biology
 Cellular and Molecular Biology            Psychology
                                           Russian
Statistics
Women’s Studies
                                                        2007-08                  2006-07
         Academic Minor Proposals                            24                     13
         New (6))                                      Biology
         Chemistry                                     Chemical Measurement Science
         Chemical Physics                              Chemical Physics
         Polymer Chemistry                             Chemistry
         Chemical Measurement Science                  East European Studies
         Biochemistry                                  Ecology and Evolutionary Biology
         Peace and Social Justice                      Economics
                                                       Environment
         Modifications (18)                            Modern Western European Studies
         Anthropology Archaeology                        (renamed Modern European Studies)
         Applied Statistics                            Neuroscience
         Asian Languages and Cultures                  Plant Biology
         Asian Studies                                 Russian Studies
         Biochemistry                                  Statistics

Discussions/Reports

Academic Advising Report
Admissions: Fall 2007 LSA Entering Class
Approved International Minor for Engineers
Approving Courses with GSI Lead Discussion Sections
Approving Distribution for Specific Topics taught as Part of a Study Abroad Program
Changing College Policies for Academic Minors
Clarifying College Grading Policies
College of Engineering's New International Minor
Current Issues in Undergraduate Education
Current Use of ―Clickers‖ in the Classroom
Curriculum Committee Procedures
Generic Descriptions for HU, NS, and SS Distribution
Graduate Certificate Program in Judaic Studies
LSA Academic Advising Report
Matthews Underclass Teaching Award
Role of Academic Affairs in Adjudicating Cases of Academic Misconduct
Summary of Committee Activities for 2007-2008
Sweetland Writing Center’s Report on SWC 400
Textbook Task Force Report
UM Admissions: Fall 2007 LSA Entering Class
Update on Academic Minor in International Studies
                   LSA ACADEMIC MINORS APPROVED AS OF APRIL 2008
                                   http://www.lsa.umich.edu/saa/minors.html

1.    African American Theatre (Theatre & Drama)        40. International Studies (International &
2.    Afroamerican & African Studies (CAAS)                 Comparative Studies)
3.    Anthropology                                      41. Italian
4.    Applied Statistics                                42. Judaic Studies
5.    Asian Languages & Cultures                        43. Language, Literature, Culture of Ancient Greece
6.    Asian Studies                                     44. Language, Literature, Culture of Ancient Rome
7.    Asian/Pacific American Studies (American          45. Latin American & Caribbean Studies (LACS)
      Culture)                                          46. Latina/o Studies (American Culture)
8.    Astronomy & Astrophysics                          47. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer
9.    Biochemistry                                          (LGBTQ) & Sexuality Studies (Women’s
10.   Biological Anthropology                               Studies)
11.   Biology                                           48. Linguistics
12.   Biophysics                                        49. Mathematics
13.   Chemical Measurement Science                      50. Medical Anthropology
14.   Chemical Physics                                  51. Medieval & Early Modern Studies (MEMS)
15.   Chemistry                                         52. Mind & Meaning (Philosophy)
16.   Classical Archaeology (Classical Studies)         53. Modern European Studies
17.   Classical Civilization                            54. Modern Greek Studies (Classical Studies)
18.   Computer Science                                  55. Modern Middle Eastern & North African Studies
19.   Crime & Justice (RC)                                  (CMENAS)
20.   Czech Language, Literature, & Culture             56. Moral & Political Philosophy
21.   Early Christian Studies (NES/Classical Studies)   57. Music
22.   Earth Sciences — General                          58. Native American Studies (American Culture)
23.   East European Studies (CREES)                     59. Near Eastern Languages & Cultures (NES)
24.   Ecology & Evolutionary Biology (EEB)              60. Oceanography
25.   Economics                                         61. Paleontology
26.   Environment                                       62. Peace & Social Justice (RC)
27.   Environmental Geology                             63. Physics
28.   Epistemology & Philosophy of Science              64. Plant Biology (EEB)
29.   French & Francophone Studies                      65. Polish Language, Literature, & Culture
30.   Gender & Health (Women’s Studies)                 66. Political Science
31.   Gender, Race, & Ethnicity (Women’s Studies)       67. Polymer Chemistry
32.   General Philosophy                                68. Russian Language, Literature, & Culture
33.   Geochemistry                                      69. Russian Studies
34.   German Studies                                    70. Scandinavian Studies
35.   Global Change (Program in the Environment)        71. Science, Technology, & Society (RC)
36.   Global Media Studies (Screen Arts & Cultures)     72. Spanish Language, Literature, & Culture
37.   History                                           73. Statistics
38.   History of Art                                    74. Text-to-Performance (RC)
39.   History of Philosophy                             75. Urban & Community Studies (RC)

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:25
posted:10/18/2011
language:English
pages:64