1. A special meeting of the Faculty Senate was called to order at 3:35 p.m. in the Galanti Lounge, University Library, Chairperson Rollo-Koster presiding.

The agenda indicated that the purpose of the special meeting was to discuss the Report of the General Education Committee, of July 30, 2015, in which changes to the General Education Program were proposed. Because no actions were planned nor published with the agenda, establishing a quorum was not necessary.  Attendance was not recorded.

2. Chairperson Rollo-Koster announced the purpose of the meeting and asked that non-senators sign the Permission to Speak form. She reiterated that no voting was planned.  Any motions from the floor concerning the General Education Report, she said, would be ruled out of order.

Chairperson Rollo-Koster summarized the implementation developments since the General Education Program had been approved in March 2014.  She explained that the Faculty Senate Executive Committee had appointed an ad hoc committee of the Senate, the General Education Implementation Steering Team (GEIST), which had begun its work in September 2014.  Rubric workshops had been offered in April and May 2015, and course development workshops had been offered to faculty over the summer.  Over 150 faculty had participated and their feedback helped to produce some of the changes that were being proposed.  Faculty who attended the workshops indicated intent to propose 160 courses.  Since July 30, when the general education course submission form was made available, 75 course proposals have been submitted, covering nearly 140 full outcomes, offering approximately 27,000 seats.  Courses in student learning outcomes Social and Behavioral Sciences and Humanities propose over 5000 seats.  Approximately 4000 seats have been proposed in Global; courses in Writing and STEM have each proposed more than 2000 seats; nearly 1600 seats have been proposed in Grand Challenge courses (not a student learning outcome).  90% of the courses are proposed to assess two full outcomes.

Chairperson Rollo-Koster thanked the members of the Implementation Team, the General Education Committee, faculty who participated in workshops, and faculty who comprise the course approval panels.  She also thanked the Provost for offering financial support for summer committee work and for financial incentives to develop courses.

3. Professor Kinnie, Chair of the General Education Committee (GEC), presented the General Education Committee Special Report (July 30, 2015). He said that the original structure of the Program was based on eleven student learning outcomes.  Feedback from faculty and the work of the Implementation Team has prompted the following changes: separating the Arts and Humanities outcome into two distinct student learning outcomes, Humanities, and Arts and Design; eliminating the Integrative student learning outcome; and limit to three (or up to 12 credits) the number of general education courses within the same disciplinary code.  Professor Kinnie said that the Implementation Team had met with a representative from the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC) in late May.  Changes to the course rubrics and the proposed structural changes were the result faculty reactions and concerns that NEASC guidelines were not adequately addressed in the program.

Director Swift, Chair of the General Education Implementation Steering Team, and Professor Kinnie answered questions about the proposed changes.  Faculty expressed concerns about academic balance among the outcomes described as Knowledge Areas.  Senators from the College of Engineering said that, if adopted, the proposed changes would potentially add 9 – 12 credits to their degree programs.  There was concern that implementation of the program was rushed and that the timeline to offer the Program to the freshmen entering in Fall 2016 did not allow departments adequate opportunity to plan their course offerings.  Questions were raised about the proposal to eliminate the Integrative outcome.  Members of Implementation Steering Team and the GEC said that the Integrative rubric did not fit the existing Capstone courses intended, in 2014, to be able to fulfill this outcome.  Discussion ensued about the value of integrative courses but the difficulty in designing their assessment.  Committee members answered questions about the limit on the number of courses from the same course code that could be used to count toward the 40 credits of General Education courses.  Senator Boudreaux-Bartels asked the Senate Chairperson to consider delaying the vote on the proposed changes until the October Faculty Senate meeting.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy Neff