November 2, 2007 minutes

Minutes of the LPWG
Curriculum Discussion
Friday November 2, 2007 – 3 p.m.
McNeill 109

In attendance: Nancy St. Clair, Stephanie Krauth, Kedron Bardwell, Lydia Sinapova, Patti Young, Murphy Waggoner, Sal Meyers, Lora Friedrich, Bill Friedricks, Steve Griffith, Jim Hayes, Walter Pearson

Dean Griffith opened the meeting with a review of the minutes from the October 19 meeting. He noted that minutes will be on the Dean’s page web site as follows: http://www.simpson.edu/academicdean/committees/lpwg/index.html

He also emphasized that committee members should remind colleagues that when reading the minutes to understand the committee is just in a discussion mode. There is no proposal on the table yet. The Academic Dean wants transparency and wants persons to read the conversations taking place.

In understanding of the task for today’s meeting, the Dean referenced everyone to the top portion of the AAC&U learning outcomes list which is Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World. This would begin the discussion for the day.

Kedron Bardwell said that being liberally education, one must have some sort of breadth and when he broached this idea with his students, they wondered why include such subjects as art or music. They considered these to be more like hobbies.

Many agreed with the perception by students and Murphy said that concerns we have right now are that students don’t understand the connections -- that courses should build on one another – that is not a current concept.

Kedron said even the connections between majors such as a relation from philosophy to theology to science to social science.

Dean Griffith said that the organizing principles have to be clear to make those connections.

Bill Friedricks said that this is a problem with the Cornerstones. Persons don’t know how or why they were set up as they were. He stated that we need to explain to all faculty what the Cornerstone is about.

Murphy added that it has to be perfectly understandable to the student that ‘this is why I’m taking this course.’

Dean Griffith recounted that from the 1950’s there are different ways of knowing the world i.e. Scientific, Arts, Social Science…

Lydia said that there should be a connectedness to the different ways of knowing the world.

Kedron thought it would be helpful to chart out the origins of the ways of knowing – i.e. this one is scientific, this one is aesthetic… He also said “ I had no idea what I was to be covering in coming in as a new professor teaching a Cornerstone until I saw the evaluation questions of the course at the end of the term.”

Murphy expressed interest in a gen ed program in which a student takes courses in a variety of areas. But she wondered if it was necessary to have a capstone experience as a part of the gen ed program. She described a model of taking 4 courses with a theme. Then the 4 professors get together to provide the capstone experience. With the theme model, one is not just taking courses to get a check mark or be inoculated. There is connection.

Walter asked Murphy if she knew a place that does something like this.

Murphy responded that Bates does this.

John Pauley then said, “I visited this school and the professor I spoke with said that faculty embraced this change wholly.” He went on to describe the model at Bates as having about 20 – 25 themes to choose from. You chart your theme and study throughout the years. For example a social justice theme may include the sociology, theology and psychology departments. This could lead to interesting new courses also. At Bates, a student would select 2 areas of concentration – 8 courses total to complete. There were no foreign language requirements at this school.

Kedron said that problems might be:

1. Coordination between the persons teaching

2. Over time, people might start to take more stake in their personal departmental courses than for the theme courses

Lydia asked if the theme could tie together several majors.

John said yes.

Bill wondered what happens if a student starts in a concentration and wishes to switch concentrations – would that be a problem?

Stephanie Krauth agreed with this concern and said that she thought it might be a problem. Being in the track mentality -- if a student gets on a track and she/he want to back out, how do they do this and not potentially feel like baling?

John Pauley said that 2 things strike him:

1. I’d rather have this practical problem than persons checking off boxes.

2. If you make really interesting courses, this might not be a problem.

Stephanie said that her other question is where does the transfer fit into this?

And Bill Friedricks added how does this work for DAL students?

Walter Pearson said that more faculty would need to talk together to mesh courses and a theme.

Sal noted that the hand out listed 16 courses from which a student could select their 4 for the theme track.

Steve Griffith asked what about one course from each of the 5 divisions?

Kedron asked what would the philosophy be behind this idea – the current make up of the Divisions doesn’t make any sense –

Lydia Sinapova said that she would like to see students in a particular major or discipline see how their discipline relates to other disciplines.

John Pauley stated that our students really don’t understand the connection between the disciplines.

Dean Griffith then proposed the idea of 1 course from each of the 5 divisions and a 6th course that is a course that explains how the 5 divisions are interconnected.

A question was raised asking isn’t this the goal of the current Simpson Cornerstones?

And a retort – do we accomplish this?

Murphy Waggoner then said that in support of one from each division with a 6th capstone course that she encourages her students to take courses that they are just interested in and not to focus on a minor but only focus on interest.

It was suggested that we design titles of concentration and then that we allow the students to design course path around the title.

Sal said she would like to see students get the skills that they need and the breadth that they need. She finds value in having breadth without any coherence so that the student would be allowed the opportunity to explore.

John Pauley noted that you could get some significant breadth in methodology.

Bill Friedricks then said that a school like Bates is a very different school with a different population – they are highly selective and have a very sophisticated student body.

Dean Griffith then asked if there are other models that came out this summer that we should put on the table.

Sal said there is the model where there is a yearlong liberal arts course. Faculty rotates through the class groups. You’re only doing gen ed and not trying to start the major or meet other course needs.

Kedron cautioned that he thought you would have to be very careful with a model such as this. Faculty would really need to work together. He suggested this as a cool faculty retreat with discussion, wine, and cheese. The topics of the retreat would cover coming up with a core set of knowledge to put into an inter-disciplinary course to make connections.

Murphy asked is it important to know where something is coming from or is it important to know what’s in a subject?

Dean Griffith then said that the Structures group will come up with specific recommendations and then will present to the full faculty. We need to come up with the shape – it doesn’t need to be nailed down.

John Pauley said that somewhere on the Bates web site is information describing how critical thinking is built into the curriculum - http://abacus.bates.edu/catalog/?s=292&a=renderDept&d=GEC

Dean Griffith then adjourned the meeting charging the members to check out the Bates web site and also investigate other sites.

Respectfully submitted,

Shelly Priebe


	Faculty Resources Academic Committees Academic Council Dean's Bio Prospective Faculty
110207 minutes Minutes of the LPWG Curriculum Discussion Friday November 2, 2007 – 3 p.m. McNeill 109 In attendance: Nancy St. Clair, Stephanie Krauth, Kedron Bardwell, Lydia Sinapova, Patti Young, Murphy Waggoner, Sal Meyers, Lora Friedrich, Bill Friedricks, Steve Griffith, Jim Hayes, Walter Pearson Dean Griffith opened the meeting with a review of the minutes from the October 19 meeting. He noted that minutes will be on the Dean’s page web site as follows: http://www.simpson.edu/academicdean/committees/lpwg/index.html He also emphasized that committee members should remind colleagues that when reading the minutes to understand the committee is just in a discussion mode. There is no proposal on the table yet. The Academic Dean wants transparency and wants persons to read the conversations taking place. In understanding of the task for today’s meeting, the Dean referenced everyone to the top portion of the AAC&U learning outcomes list which is Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World. This would begin the discussion for the day. Kedron Bardwell said that being liberally education, one must have some sort of breadth and when he broached this idea with his students, they wondered why include such subjects as art or music. They considered these to be more like hobbies. Many agreed with the perception by students and Murphy said that concerns we have right now are that students don’t understand the connections -- that courses should build on one another – that is not a current concept. Kedron said even the connections between majors such as a relation from philosophy to theology to science to social science. Dean Griffith said that the organizing principles have to be clear to make those connections. Bill Friedricks said that this is a problem with the Cornerstones. Persons don’t know how or why they were set up as they were. He stated that we need to explain to all faculty what the Cornerstone is about. Murphy added that it has to be perfectly understandable to the student that ‘this is why I’m taking this course.’ Dean Griffith recounted that from the 1950’s there are different ways of knowing the world i.e. Scientific, Arts, Social Science… Lydia said that there should be a connectedness to the different ways of knowing the world. Kedron thought it would be helpful to chart out the origins of the ways of knowing – i.e. this one is scientific, this one is aesthetic… He also said “ I had no idea what I was to be covering in coming in as a new professor teaching a Cornerstone until I saw the evaluation questions of the course at the end of the term.” Murphy expressed interest in a gen ed program in which a student takes courses in a variety of areas. But she wondered if it was necessary to have a capstone experience as a part of the gen ed program. She described a model of taking 4 courses with a theme. Then the 4 professors get together to provide the capstone experience. With the theme model, one is not just taking courses to get a check mark or be inoculated. There is connection. Walter asked Murphy if she knew a place that does something like this. Murphy responded that Bates does this. John Pauley then said, “I visited this school and the professor I spoke with said that faculty embraced this change wholly.” He went on to describe the model at Bates as having about 20 – 25 themes to choose from. You chart your theme and study throughout the years. For example a social justice theme may include the sociology, theology and psychology departments. This could lead to interesting new courses also. At Bates, a student would select 2 areas of concentration – 8 courses total to complete. There were no foreign language requirements at this school. Kedron said that problems might be: 1. Coordination between the persons teaching 2. Over time, people might start to take more stake in their personal departmental courses than for the theme courses Lydia asked if the theme could tie together several majors. John said yes. Bill wondered what happens if a student starts in a concentration and wishes to switch concentrations – would that be a problem? Stephanie Krauth agreed with this concern and said that she thought it might be a problem. Being in the track mentality -- if a student gets on a track and she/he want to back out, how do they do this and not potentially feel like baling? John Pauley said that 2 things strike him: 1. I’d rather have this practical problem than persons checking off boxes. 2. If you make really interesting courses, this might not be a problem. Stephanie said that her other question is where does the transfer fit into this? And Bill Friedricks added how does this work for DAL students? Walter Pearson said that more faculty would need to talk together to mesh courses and a theme. Sal noted that the hand out listed 16 courses from which a student could select their 4 for the theme track. Steve Griffith asked what about one course from each of the 5 divisions? Kedron asked what would the philosophy be behind this idea – the current make up of the Divisions doesn’t make any sense – Lydia Sinapova said that she would like to see students in a particular major or discipline see how their discipline relates to other disciplines. John Pauley stated that our students really don’t understand the connection between the disciplines. Dean Griffith then proposed the idea of 1 course from each of the 5 divisions and a 6th course that is a course that explains how the 5 divisions are interconnected. A question was raised asking isn’t this the goal of the current Simpson Cornerstones? And a retort – do we accomplish this? Murphy Waggoner then said that in support of one from each division with a 6th capstone course that she encourages her students to take courses that they are just interested in and not to focus on a minor but only focus on interest. It was suggested that we design titles of concentration and then that we allow the students to design course path around the title. Sal said she would like to see students get the skills that they need and the breadth that they need. She finds value in having breadth without any coherence so that the student would be allowed the opportunity to explore. John Pauley noted that you could get some significant breadth in methodology. Bill Friedricks then said that a school like Bates is a very different school with a different population – they are highly selective and have a very sophisticated student body. Dean Griffith then asked if there are other models that came out this summer that we should put on the table. Sal said there is the model where there is a yearlong liberal arts course. Faculty rotates through the class groups. You’re only doing gen ed and not trying to start the major or meet other course needs. Kedron cautioned that he thought you would have to be very careful with a model such as this. Faculty would really need to work together. He suggested this as a cool faculty retreat with discussion, wine, and cheese. The topics of the retreat would cover coming up with a core set of knowledge to put into an inter-disciplinary course to make connections. Murphy asked is it important to know where something is coming from or is it important to know what’s in a subject? Dean Griffith then said that the Structures group will come up with specific recommendations and then will present to the full faculty. We need to come up with the shape – it doesn’t need to be nailed down. John Pauley said that somewhere on the Bates web site is information describing how critical thinking is built into the curriculum - http://abacus.bates.edu/catalog/?s=292&a=renderDept&d=GEC Dean Griffith then adjourned the meeting charging the members to check out the Bates web site and also investigate other sites. Respectfully submitted, Shelly Priebe
About Simpson \| Admissions \| Evening, Weekend & Graduate Programs \| Academics \| Alumni Athletics \| Arts & Forum \| Campus & Community \| Student Life \| Support Simpson Simpson.edu \| Site Map \| Contact Us © Copyright 2008 Simpson College Last Updated: 11/12/07	SEARCH: