UNDERGRADUATE COUNCIL MEETING                            

Johnson Hall Conference Room

October 4, 2007

 

Present:

Andrew Bonamici, Gavin Bruce, Herb Chereck, Hilary Gerdes, Dave Hubin, Elizabeth Jarvis, Anne Laskaya, Dean Livelybrooks, Alexandra Marcus, Lyllye Parker, Steven Pologe, Karen McLaughlin, Ron Severson, Kate Wagle, Bill Rossi, Alan Kimball,

 

Absent:

Andrew Leavitt, Karen Sprague, Arkady Vaintrob, Malcolm Wilson, Paul Engelking, Elizabeth Reis, and Jim Imamura

 

 

Introductions:

The Chair invited the members of the Council to introduce themselves around the table.   

 

Agenda

Overview of work ahead

The Chair outlined the major projects the Council is currently working on:

            The Chair recounted the Council’s work in reviewing multicultural courses which is still ongoing.  It is hoped that the multicultural project will be concluded within the first few sessions that the Council meets during the Fall term.

 

            Another issue the Council is working on is grade inflation.  The Chair noted the work already done by the Council on this topic:

            -  a lot of fact finding has been done;

            -  a lot of data analysis has been undertaken;

            -  the Council has presented a preliminary report to the Senate;

            -  feedback has been solicited from departments around the campus.

 

The Chair explained that the Council will move towards concluding its study on grade inflation as soon as the multicultural review is completed.  He also pointed out that grade inflation is related to assessment; there is a need to establish a clear understanding of the meaning of grades.  This has larger implications for discussions around the state.

 

            Dave Hubin noted that grade inflation as assessment is clearly addressed in the Accreditation Self-study report.  He reminded Council members of the recommendation from NWUCC that by Spring 2008, UO will have to have a campus-wide assessment system in place.  He said that Provost Linda Brady is working on an assessment plan and will rely heavily on the Undergraduate Council and the Graduate Council.

            He also indicated that the ASUO is interested in the work undertaken by the university regarding the curriculum, particularly:

            -  the establishment of clear goals

            -  the statement of clear expectations

            -  meaningful assessment

 

            The Chair reminded Council members that the ongoing work of the Council included the review of new program proposals that would be submitted by departments.

 

            Finally, he solicited ideas and suggestions from the Council for other work the Council might pursue. 

·         There is still need to consider a request from International Programs allowing study abroad to fulfill a multicultural requirement.  The Chair responded that this request will be part of the multicultural review discussion when the Council considered recommendations.

 

·         An audit by OUS requires a response from the Registrar’s Office by the end of the Fall term to address two issues:

-  the current UO grading system has no checks and balances of grade changes by departed faculty;

               -  there is currently no time limit on when faculty can change grades.

·         There are requests from academic units to look at shortening drop/add time periods.

 

·         It is important to discuss senior capstone projects and undergraduate research , perhaps as part of the assessment discussion.

 

The Chair encouraged members to e-mail in ideas for other topics they felt the Council should examine.

 

 

Multicultural course review

            The Chair said that a large part of the Council’s charge is to review the General Education curriculum.  Group-satisfying courses have been reviewed previously by the Council in 2003-2004.  In 2007, the Council undertook a review of courses designated as fulfilling the Multicultural requirement.  He described the survey sheet designed by the Council to examine how courses conformed to the criteria for multicultural courses as stated in the university course catalog.

 

            From the Spring term through the summer of 2007, the Council has examined the syllabi of 200 courses designated as fulfilling the multicultural course.  The courses generally were ranked in one of four evaluative designations:

                  - a course met the criteria of the multicultural category in which it was listed and was deemed acceptable by the Council with no need for further review;

 

                  -  a course appeared to meet the criteria of the multicultural category in which it was listed, but the syllabus was not developed enough to make an assured judgment.  It was generally determined by the Council that “More Information was Needed” before a full evaluation could be made;

 

                  -  a course appeared to be multicultural, but not in the category in which it is listed in the course catalog.  The Council felt the course might more appropriately be listed in a different multicultural category.

 

                  -  a course did not appear to meet the criteria for any of the multicultural categories. However, since only half the Council did the first evaluation of the course, the course was referred to the full Council for “Needing More Review” before a final evaluation is made.

 

The Chair reviewed the three multicultural categories with the Council members, particularly for the benefit of the new members.

 

The Council began the final review of the 18 courses which had been referred for full Council review.  Due to shortness of time, the Council could discuss only the first course.  This course was judged not to meet the criteria for being designated a multicultural course.

 

The remaining courses will be reviewed at the next meeting.

 

The meeting was adjourned.

 

The next UGC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 18, 2007, 11:00am at Johnson Hall Conference Room.