Genereal Education Council - Minutes of April 21, 2006

Present: Sandra Cadena, Scott Campbell, Ronald Dulaney, Irene Frank, David Frankel, Sharon Geiger, Bill Hayden, John Hodgson, Gladis Kersaint, Joan Morris, Joseph Moxley, William Murray, Gregory Paveza, Ram Pendyala, Suzanne Perry-Casler, Robert Potter (Chair), Trevor Purcell, Andrew Smith, Terry Sincich, Nancy White, Judy Wilkerson

Guests/Ex officio members: Teresa Flateby, Janet Moore, Chris Ponticelli, Diane Williams

The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. The next meeting time was set for May 5, 2006.

1. Application review ( Diane Williams):
   GEC Review Team Orientation: Preparation to Review Online General Education Course Applications materials were prepared by C21TE. Dr Williams presented these materials to assist GEC members in planning for future course reviews. Discussion of details and procedures ensued, including those for retaining anonymity of reviewers. Ideas were proposed for ways to present a course to GEC once a subcommittee has finished its part. How much sending back for revision is appropriate, and when has the subcommittee done its part? Who will be contact persons for the GEC for each course submitted? How will areas needing revisions on a submission be identified? It was concluded that many short term decisions would be made knowing that revisions in format and the final process can be made in the future.

2. The Council looked at an actual course proposal and discussed the features of the present format. Identifying the delivery method(s) will be an important feature for understanding the other parts toward course approval. Revisions to the present format were made in light of this element (on-line/lecture class/hybrid/ etc.).

   Discussions about instructor qualifications, class sizes, number of TA's & peer mentors, and other details ensued. Concern was again expressed about GEC's ability to fund the needed TA's & peer mentors per its recommendations. This will be an on-going concern.

   On the issue of evaluating the level of inquiry-based learning evident in a course submission, the GEC will most likely expect it will take the form of guided inquiry-based learning. The recognition that these are lower level courses is an important factor to consider as well.

3. RECOMMENDATION: The recommendation was made by Dr. Murray for the approval process to include a meeting when the course contact person will meet with the GEC to answer any questions and have the opportunity to explain features of the course, allowing key information not captured in the proposal to come forward for consideration. Eventually this process should result in a procedure that is as efficient as possible but allows for adequate input from the contact person during the final review. No motion was made at this time.

   Next GEC mtg. May 5th 9-11 AM

Please send any suggestions or comments to:
Margaret Martinroe - webcat@ugs.usf.edu