Transcript URI General Education Program Revision Update 3/31/11

URI General Education Program
Revision Update 3/22/12
A REPORT TO THE FACULTY SENATE
UPDATING PROGRESS ON THE REVISION OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND’S
GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENT
Academic Plan - Reinvigorate the general education program
to assure relevance in preparing students for the future.
1.Integrate general education courses with those in the major in order to better establish
them as relevant building blocks of a progressive undergraduate education model.
2.Develop interdisciplinary, disciplinary, and problem-based freshman seminars. Key
elements should include: problem solving, information literacy, global and multicultural
perspectives, quantitative reasoning, environmental literacy, health literacy, critical
thinking, and perhaps a self-designed element outside of the major.
3.Establish integrating themes in the first two years based on “grand challenges,” (e.g.,
poverty, nonviolence, economic development, renewable energy, climate change, etc.).
4.Consider developing general education courses designed to establish multicultural
competence as a learning outcome for all students.
5.Streamline the general education offerings and deliver in an efficient manner, challenging
and supporting students and exploring a 4-credit model where useful or valuable.
6.Elevate the importance, value, and prestige associated with teaching of general education
curriculum and freshman courses, ensuring the involvement of tenure-track faculty and
lecturers as appropriate to maximize faculty-student interaction.
7.Build on learning communities to ensure that students make meaningful connections
between subject matter across courses or disciplines and with other students.
Other Important Elements
 Academic Summit 2009-General Education discussion
Increase expectations
 Problem-focused not menu driven
 Integration of knowledge (not just knowledge acquisition)
 Collaborative learning
 ‘Authentic’ problems that students care about
 General Education Task Force
 Development of Grand Challenge courses for URI’s General
Education Program
 Living Learning Communities
 Opportunity for theme-based housing for those students who are
interested

Other Organizations and Institutions
 AACU – Association of American Colleges and Universities



LEAP Outcomes – Liberal Education and America’s Promise
National initiative that began in 2005 and defined essential learning outcomes
Partnerships with campuses, state systems (MA, CA, etc) , and K-12 leaders
 Lynn University – Dialogues of Learning



3 Dialogues – Self and Society, Belief and Reason, Justice and Civic Life
Seminars at Foundational (100/200) and Integrative/Capstone (300/400) levels
Learning Outcomes, based on LEAP
 University of Rochester



Major is in Humanities and Arts, Social Sciences, or Natural Sciences & Engineering
2nd major or 3-course clusters in each of the other 2 broad areas
Foundational writing course, and advanced writing in major or elsewhere
 Appalachian State

2 or 3 course sequences in themes from 4 perspectives
 Temple, BC, BU, U of M, and the new RIC program
Charge from FSEC, Sept 2011
• Meet the requirements of NEASC (40 credits)
• Remove the "first two year" model of General Education
• Work well with the most restrictive colleges and programs
• Allow for 3-, 4-, and other-credit courses
• Support dynamic, interdisciplinary courses to attract and
engage students
To the extent possible, the proposal should:
• Be universal – consistent and flexible enough to fit all
majors and allow students freedom to move between majors
and colleges
• Focus on learning outcomes
• Include a schedule for implementation and suggest
incentives for faculty making the transition
UCGE Process
 Review of AACU guidelines and other general




education programs
Faculty Forums (Spring 2011, Fall 2012)
Presentation to Faculty Senate (May 2011)
Student Forum and Student Senate (Fall 2012)
Visits to College and Department Faculty Meetings
(Spring 2012)
 Upcoming – more college meetings, Providence
campus, administrative offices
Why these choices of outcomes?
 ”State of the art" for general education, with careful
attention to URI's own special priorities (e.g. global,
multicultural, interdisciplinary integration)
 Explicit representation in the requirements

highly probable that courses will be allowed to meet more than one of
the learning outcomes (e.g. a course may be designated to count for Arts
& Humanities, Writing, and Global Responsibility outcomes).
 To be approved, a course will have to show:


how required student work will address the identified learning outcomes
that work will contribute to learning outcomes assessment process for
general education
Outcome Area A – Knowledge
 Build knowledge of diverse peoples and cultures
and of the natural and physical world.
Understand the context and significance of the arts and
humanities using theoretical, historical, and
experiential perspectives. [more]
 Understand and apply knowledge, theories, and methods
of the science, technology, engineering, and
mathematical (STEM) disciplines. [more]
 Understand theories and methods of the social and
behavioral sciences. [more]

Outcome Area B – Intellectual and Interdisciplinary
Competencies
 Develop intellectual and interdisciplinary
competencies for academic and lifelong learning.
Write effective and precise texts that fulfill their
communicative purposes and address various audiences.
[more]
 Communicate effectively via listening, delivering oral
presentations, and actively participating in group work.
[more]
 Apply the appropriate mathematical, statistical, or
computational strategies to problem solving. [more]
 Develop information literacy to independently
research complex issues. [more]

Outcome Area C – Individual and Social Responsibility
 Exercise individual and social responsibilities.
 Develop civic knowledge and engagement. [more]
 Develop and exercise global competencies. [more]
 Develop and exercise multicultural competencies.
[more]
Outcome Area D – Integration and Application
 Integrate and apply these abilities and
capacities, adapting them to new settings,
questions, and responsibilities to lay the
foundation for lifelong learning.
Reflect upon a common theme or conversation linked
to contemporary problems from a variety of knowledge
perspectives. [more]
 Demonstrate a mastery of broad knowledge, appropriate
technical proficiency, information collection, synthesis,
interpretation, presentation, and reflection in a creative
or scholarly product. [more]

Possible Structure
 All students need 40 credits of gen ed courses
 More flexibility in course selection
 Require some fundamental courses
 Developmental, across all 4 years including major
 An approved course might focus on 2-4 outcomes
 Interdisciplinary, possibly by requiring 1 or more
themes or conversations
 Require a capstone or senior project in the major,
minor, or conversation (60% of graduates already!)
Comparison of Proposed Outcomes with
Existing “Integrated Skills”
 Ex. PSY 113 [S] (D) General Psychology
 Approved for read complex text, write effectively,
examine human differences
 New outcomes might be writing and either civic
engagement or multicultural competencies
 Ex. HIS 171 [L or FC] (D) East Asian Culture &
History


Approved for read complex text, write effectively,
examine human differences, information literacy
New outcomes might be writing or information literacy
and global competencies
Universality and Transferring
 General Education is “the major of URI”
 If a student meets requirements for gen ed in one
major or college, they meet gen ed for all
 Departments or colleges may impose other
requirements (for pre-requisites, different degree
types, professional certification, etc)
 Transfers from outside of URI should continue to
have some flexibility
Challenges
 Seat management
 Advising training and implementation
 Resources for implementation
 E-Campus and coding
 Coordination of transition
 Re-submission of courses
 Approval of courses
 Assessment process
 Coordinate with program assessment?
Next Steps
 Continue to meet with colleges and administration
 Refine structure details
 Return to Faculty Senate in April and/or May
 Vote on Outcomes
 Consider vote on Structure
 2012-2013 Academic Year – submission of new or
existing courses for approval
 RFP for themes or conversations (?)
 Aim for implementation in Fall 2013 (?)

Consider phased implementation
Forum
 Open discussion


Outcomes
Requirements (structure)
 Forum Feedback Forms
 Email [email protected] for upcoming department
meetings
 Need for volunteers on UCGE and SAGE!
UCGE Committee Members
 Valerie Maier-Speredelozzi,









COE (chair)
Doug Creed, BUS*
Walter von Reinhart, GER*
John Stevenson, PSY*
Adam Roth, COM
Carolyn Betensky, ENG
Mary Leveille, NUR
Celia MacDonnell, PHAR
Karen McCurdy, HSS
Carol Thornber, CELS
 Mona Niedbala, LIB
 Kat Quina, CCE
 Anne Hubbard, CCE
 Jayne Richmond, UC
 Melissa Boyd-Colvin, St. Aff.
 Students: Ethan Zawatsky and




Emily Dionne
Sandy Hicks (past chair)
Peter Larsen (FSEC)
Laura Beauvais (vice provost)
Sheila Black Grubman