UCAP Meeting of 10/25/2001
2001-2002
agenda status: approved
Agenda:
University Committee on Academic Policy
Meeting of Thursday, October 25, 2001
10:15 a.m., Board Room, Administration Building
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Approval of Minutes of the September 27, 2001 meeting (Attachment)
3. Comments from the Chairperson
4. Comments from the Assistant Provost
5. Guidelines for Group Projects
6. SOCT Follow-Up
7. Roundtable
Attachment: September 27, 2001 Draft Minutes
Please phone or E-Mail Robin Pline (353-5380; pline@msu.edu) if you cannot be present.
minutes status: not approved
UCAP Minutes for meeting held on 10/25/2001
University Committee on Academic Policy
Minutes
October 25, 2001
Members Present: Henry Beckmeyer, Bridget Behe, Howard Bossen, James
Gallagher, Joe Mignano, Shaun Phillips, Jon Sticklen, Jeanne Wald,
Winston Wilkinson, Celia Wills, Cameron Wooley, Maija Zile
Others Present: Barbara Steidle (Assistant Provost), Patricia Croom (Administration Information Services)
1.
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
2.
Approval of Minutes of the September 27, 2001 Meeting
Minutes were approved with only a minor spelling change noted.
3.
Comments from the Chairperson
Jon Sticklen introduced three new committee members and noted that
all committee posts were now filled. The new members were Professors
Maija Zile (Human Ecology) and Celia Wills (Nursing) and two new student
representatives from ASMSU – Joe Mignano and Cameron Wooley. He also
noted that the new members would be assigned to appropriate
sub-committees. Sticklen will send the new members the list of
subcommittees for their consideration.
4.
Comments from the Assistant Provost:
Barbara Steidle stated that several seminars, colloquia and symposia
had occurred, and are occurring, on campus in response to the disasters
of September 11 and subsequent events. The first session of the
All-University Symposium was held on October 23; the next two sessions
are scheduled for October 30 (“Target America;” Putting September 11 in
Context) in 206 Old Horticulture Bldg. and November 14 (How Will our
World Be Different?) in C107 McDonel. The first event was well attended
and well received. A number of other University departments are also
sponsoring discussion forums and speakers to enrich our understandings
of the recent events and their consequences.
Steidle noted the scare at Linton Hall in which a letter addressed to
the Vice-President for Research was received and found to contain a
suspicious substance, but which was later found to be harmless. She
indicated that precautions were being taken throughout the University to
protect the community members. Celia Wills suggested that the CDC web
site should be posted as a source of useful information for staff and
administrators regarding such events.
Steidle also reported that an updated policy on staff and students who
are called to active military duty has been distributed to Deans,
Directors, Chairs, and managers including all who supervise personnel.
It will be placed on the UCAP web site in the Information Item area.
5.
Guidelines for Group Work
Sticklen, UCAP Chair, introduced the question of guidelines for
group work in university courses as an issue that had been continued
from last year. He noted that there is an increasing emphasis on group
work as part of instruction, but that we do not have policies about
group assignments, standards and grading. There are no agreed-upon
criteria for how group work should be graded. The topic was then opened
for discussion. Some of the key points of the discussion follow:
· Learning in college level courses has elements of both cooperation
and competition. Group work is recognized as an essential element of
many professions and types of work in the “real world” which students
will encounter after graduation. Group work tends to focus on
cooperation, while many students and faculty have experienced and see
instruction from a more competitive perspective. Consequently, its
place in courses can be confusing in the minds of both students and
faculty. Three key questions are (1) what purposes can group work serve
in courses, (2) how is group work to be graded and (3) how should group
members who do not fulfill their group responsibilities be dealt with?
· Faculty need guidelines on how group work should be conducted, supervised, and graded as part of instructions.
· Guidelines need to be set for students’ work in groups, especially
how all group members should meet obligations to other group members and
what should be the consequences of not doing so.
· Group work which entails a large portion of students’ grades may be
inappropriate for some courses, especially those with mixtures of majors
and non-majors, or when staffing does not permit adequate supervision
of students.
· Appropriate structuring and supervision of group activities and
processes appear to be essential parts of group work in courses,
especially when the group work counts for a substantial portion of the
course grade.
Following discussion, the Subcommittee on Group Work was charged to
provide some general Guidelines for Instructors Using Group Work for
discussion by UCAP members at an upcoming meeting, hopefully in a month.
Members of the subcommittee include Wills, Dilley, Wade and Wooley.
Wills will initiate the dialogue.
6.
SOCT Follow-up
SOCT is a means of providing students with information on perceptions of
effectiveness of course instructors in a form that is publicly available and which can
be used in making course selections. It is not, and was not intended to be, equivalent
to SIRS. UCAP developed a plan to satisfy this purpose and provided it for trial by
faculty and students. Data are available and UCAP needs to review the results, seek
wider faculty use of SOCT, and provide guidelines for posting the results for public
use by students when registering for Fall 2002.
Patricia Croom was present to seek our input in designing the web
site for posting SOCT data to permit student use of these data. An
essential question that must be answered prior to designing the web site
is, “What links will be made available for use by students?” For
example, should links include all courses that each faculty teaches?
Should links include course descriptions and course syllabi? If course
descriptions are included how will files of them be maintained? There
are some practical considerations to be recognized if the site is to be
available by the time of early enrollment in the spring.
Time ran out on this discussion and it was agreed that Ms. Croom would
return at our next meeting on November 8 to continue the discussion.
Meeting adjourned at Noon.
Respectfully submitted,
James Gallagher