See the latest updates and information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, including a list of University contact information at semo.edu/covid19.
Present: Bertrand, Cron, Curtis, Ferguson, Hathaway, Hinkle, Janzow, Jones, McDougall, McGowan,
Prater, Redmond, Shaw, Shepard, Starrett, Stephens, Syler, and Tikoo.
Guests: David Baird for Ragu Athinarayanan, Bill Eddleman, Christina Frazier, Bob Hamblin, Mike Hogan, David Reinheimer and Carol Scates.
A. Minutes of March 1, 2005. Upon a motion by McGowan; seconded by McDougall, the minutes were unanimously approved.
B. Discussion Items
Due to the lack of time at the March Academic Council meeting, the EN100 discussion which was initiated at that meeting was placed at the beginning of the agenda. David Reinheimer returned to give an overview of the process involved in composition and writing assessment. Bob Hamblin gave a historical perspective of EN100, the development of the 90 hour writing exam and creation of the Writing Center. He noted that the inclusion of EN100 as a pre-requisite to EN140 was discussed at length with development of the General Education program and was made a pre-requisite in part for campus political reasons.
The Council agreed that key issues are 1) the “hidden” pre-requisite – how the hours are listed; 2) the current testing process involved for writing and thinking skills; 3) transfer credit; 4) placement of students after testing. The following suggestions were made: to consider following the foreign language model; see what other state universities are doing with the placement test; and consider the elimination of the $75 cost to students and offer other incentives.
Stephens asked Jones, Reinheimer, and Starrett to serve as a committee to report back to the Council regarding the issues identified by the Council. Hogan and Scates may participate if they choose. Frazier suggested using FFR funds in the process if the $75 fee were to be eliminated. The Committee will either report at the next meeting in May or the first meeting of the fall semester.
C. Action Items
1. Revision in Biology Curriculum. McGowan distributed a different document with corrections. Eddleman discussed the rationale; core curriculum; the reduction of the core by 1 credit hour; and pointed out the “concentrations” that would be changed to “options.” Jones moved to approve the changes; Janzow seconded. During the discussion and comments Hinkle pointed out that the rule of having 60% of the major as upper level courses was not met. Shaw moved to make an exception to the 60% rule; McDougall seconded. The motion for exception was approved, with one opposing vote. Cron asked about library resources. Higher Education Department acceptance of option changes was discussed. Frazier pointed out the importance of the changes in regard to recruitment. Upon a motion to approve the revisions; the motion passed.
Stephens emphasized that in spite of our frequently agreeing to exceptions to the 60% rule, that we may encounter problems with future transfer requests and noted that there would be further discussion on this topic.
2. Revisions in Elementary, Early and Special Education. (Council members were previously provided a copy with the agenda.) Shepard made a motion to approve the revised document for changes in the B.S. in Elementary Education; B.S. in Exceptional Child Education and the B.S. in Early Childhood Education. After much discussion at the March meeting, the earlier motion had been withdrawn. After those discussions, changes were made to not remove MU356 from the ED255 required degree curriculum. The new motion reflects that decision. Syler seconded. The motion passed.
Hinkle advised the Council that as a part of the implementation of the new Banner system, she would be sending letters to Deans for distribution to Departments concerning courses that need to be officially closed.