Ad Hoc Steering CommitteeGroup on
General Education Reform
2006-2008
Reason: The Ad Hoc Steering Committee [CB1] onon General
Education Reform will continue the work of the
2005-2006 Ad Hoc Steering Committee Group on General
Education. It will lead the process of
General Education review and revision, as the
faculty enters the design phase of the curricular conversation on change for General
Education. The 2005-2006 Steering Group
was constituted in response to the April 2005 vote of the Faculty Assembly. That group’s charge included research into
curricular change at PLU and other colleges and universities, and fostering
conversations on possible changes in requirements, as part of a multi-year
process. This work has been done and
presented to the Faculty Assembly throughout the year. This Steering Group was
also charged to make recommendations on the next stage of the process. The creation of the Ad Hoc Steering Group
Committee
on General Education is part of this recommendation. Following the Faculty Handbook
(Bylaws to the Faculty Constitution 4a.b) and in the consultation with the
Faculty Governance Committee, the Ad Hoc Steering Committee is constituted by a
vote of the Faculty Assembly. The
Faculty Executive Committee brings this motion to the assembly.
Membership and Purpose: The proposed membership of
the Ad Hoc Steering
CommitteeGroup
on General Education Reform, as with the 2005-2006
Steering Group, intentionally reflects a broad representation of various
constituencies of the faculty, along with the current ASPLU President. A Cconcern
for faculty demographics (rank and time at PLU) and a balance of
continuity and new perspectives [CB2] isare also
reflected in the proposed membership.
The goal is to draw upon our colleagues with strong institutional wisdom
throughout the university, as well as newer voices in the
university. Faculty members have not
been invited to serve as advocates for particular units; rather, they have been
invited for their ability to work on behalf of the whole university, and for
their experience with and commitment to serving the whole. The Faculty
Handbook requires that President Anderson serve on an ad hoc committee.
Colleagues without faculty rank (though they may have faculty status) may not
have regular membership on ad hoc committees.
It bears repeating that everyone serves on behalf of the whole
faculty. The Chair and Vice Chair of
the Faculty serve by virtue of their representation of the whole faculty.
TThe committee
will not be designing[CB3] cor voting on specific
curricular proposals or modelsoordinate and facilitate the process of design and discussion. In its first year (2006-2007) this group,
working with the Educational Policies Committee, will guide and facilitate broad
campus discussions of curricular proposals and/or models
in light of the Guidelines for Pacific Lutheran University’s General Education
Program in ways that de-politicize curricular conversations and foster
communication and community-building across disciplinary boundaries. In its second year (2007-2008) it will,
working with the Educational Policies Committee, bring a proposal or proposals
forward for a vote by the Faculty Assembly. This Ad Hoc Steering
Committee will have a slightly smaller membership than either the Working Group
of 2004-2005 or the Steering Group of 2005-2006. The Faculty Handbook
requires that President Anderson serve on an ad hoc committee. Colleagues
without faculty rank (though they may have faculty status) may not have regular
membership on ad hoc committees. It
bears repeating that everyone serves on behalf of the whole faculty. The Chair and Vice Chair of the Faculty
serve by virtue of their representation of the whole faculty.
Charge: The Ad Hoc Steering Committee on General Education Reform
will serve over the next two academic years, 2006 – 2007 and 2007
– 2008. It will, Aalong with the
Educational Policies Committee, lead the design phase of the curricular conversation on
general education by to shapinge and
guidinge
conversation around specific conceptions [CB4] of general education in
relation to the Guidelines for Pacific Lutheran University’s General Education
Program. ByIn
the second year, the Steerring
Committee, along
with the Educational Policies Committee, will will
(barring any unforeseen circumstances) bring a proposal or proposals on general
education requirements at PLU to the Faculty Assembly for a vote.
Chair: Erin McKenna, Chair of the
Faculty Karen McConnell, Physical Education
Vice
Chair: Dave Robbins, Vice Chair
of the Faculty I think you should
consider a second person.[CB5]
Karl Stumo, Dean of
Admission
and Financial Aid
Student
Anne Spilman, ASPLU President 06/07Jon Grahe, Psychology??[CB7]
[CB1]I’d suggest, pretty strongly, that you call this a “Steering Committee”: it will differentiate from both last year and this year’s group; it also has a clear formality to it, corresponding to the increasingly formal nature of the task being done.
[CB2]Do you here mean experience? How is this different from “various constituencies”?
[CB3]Is this true? You are not going to “design”? I thought that’s what the next stage was about. How is this different from “curricular proposals or models”? I think this language has to be quite clear here. My own suggestion: think of this as the design phase, in which proposals, or perhaps better, models, can be considered, discussed, developed. Models might be better language, since it does not immediately suggest a “proposal” for PLU, per se.
[CB4]I think this is good language, although I think you might consider a “tag line” language for this stage, that is easy to understand: that’s why I suggest “design phase.” It would be about designing models and “specific conceptions.” The easier to understand this phase, the better. Simple and repeatable language is very useful and important.
[CB5]You’ll save yourself arguments if you have a second professional school person here.
[CB6]Can you convince Greenwood to serve?
[CB7]I do not know this person. Is he strong?