Notes on 8th work group meeting, March 14, 2003
inserted into agenda by H. Marcuse, 3/16/04

Present: H. Marcuse, M. Dahleh, D. Kohl, D. Montello, C. Michel, D. Segura, Z. Xiao, J. Proctor, J. Heinen, D. Blake, M. Higa, C. Lawson, two Associated Students candidates: Denise and Miguel.

  1. Last meeting was taped--for those not present: ok to tape this one, too?
    Yes. The tape was turned on at this point.
  2. Discussion of SocSci chairs meeting on March 10.
    Ask depts. to send us a descriptions/syllabi for 3-5 courses THEY'd consider appropriate for GE. Time frame?
    Denise’s draft memo was discussed at length in her absence. What do we want from it? Two goals: to notify departments and get them thinking about this,
  3. David's report on data on enrollments in courses in the core areas that fulfill the writing requirement
    (4 page table, made by cutting and pasting from GOLD—very labor intensive [thanks, David!])
    Our question: if we cap the course/section enrollment of WRT courses at 25, how much impact will that have? Answer: While most WRT courses with high enrollments have sections, some (notably in Soc) UD courses have enrollments up to 100. Denise S. felt strongly that these courses should not be disallowed from fulfilling WRT, even though resource issues would prevent hiring TAs. Harold mentioned Sue’s suggestion from last week that undergraduate writing tutors could be trained and employed at relatively little cost.
    Jennifer was asked whether the TA union has data on maximum section enrollments in different departments (history is capped 17, but some go to 30 or more). She will get this data.
    Harold suggested that while resource questions have always been and will probably remain problematic (in spite of Dean Woolley’s suggestion that we develop a program without regard to them, and the Task Force’s charge to ignore them), this type of tutor program is VERY cheap. We should go to bat for this type of resource. Sue, who is a national expert in this area, showed us data confirming that class size and quality of WRT courses are directly and strongly correlated.
  4. Stock-taking (only slightly modified from last week):
    AP for GE: only in quantitative, and WRT spec. req. with minimum score of 5 (NOT Wrt 2?).
    Criteria ["rules"] for inclusion on list of core courses:
    1. must be open to non-majors on first registration pass Consensus: yes.
    2. no prerequisites EXCEPT one other GE course (intended for sequence courses only)
        Dan: also not restricted to UD only [Beth/soc: leave 10 spaces in UD/majors only for GE]
    3. preferably, but not necessarily, either writing-intensive or quantitative relationships
        Dan's guideline: each dept. with GE offerings must offer some courses with WRT or QNT.
    4. frequency of offering: must be offered at least 3 times once per 1 (or 2?) 5 year(s)
    new "guidelines" from Dan:
    5. topically appropriate for core or special requirement
    6. relatively broad in scope, providing an overview of a subject area
        [Harold's idea: "surveys of knowledge" would be broad; "frontiers of inquiry" focused.]
    7. appropriate for students w/o background, ergo typically LD
  1. Area A: update description to include information technology (etc.).
  2. Area B: no change (or: raise AP score from 3 to 4, then high school grade from C to B?)
  3. Area C: Leave at 3 courses. Pare down list as per criteria.
  4. Area D: discuss chairs' feelings about reduction from 3 to 2 (pedagogic rationale);
    made more palatable by possibility of divisional courses in new core Area X.
  5. Area E: various options.
    1. (TF) remove subdivision, reduce from 3 to 2 courses, pare down list. (WCiv as special req.)
    2. (Dan) 3 courses in 3 subdivisions: WCiv, Non-WCiv, "intersections"
  6. Areas F and G: various options
    1. (TF) leave as they are with new descriptions, pare down list
    2. (Harold): combine and reduce from 4 to 3 courses, subdivision or (preferably) not
    3. Reduce further to 2 courses; new offerings in new core Area X.
  7. Special requirements
    quantitative: raise minimum AP score from 3 to 4.
    ethnicity: no change in existing; possible addition of 2nd as spec. requirement or core area
    nwc: no change, or new subcategory of Area E under Dan's proposal
    Proposals: Western civ.; interdisciplinary/comparative
    Writing-intensive: class size limitation (20/25?), rolling 3-year review
  1. Next meetings:
    Apr. 4: issue of new core vs. spec. req.; plan 2nd HFA mtg.
    Apr. 11: Implementation and management options
    -position of GE director
    -impacts on enrollment (new areas, AP) [need data!]
    -how to review existing list (roles of administration, departments, ad hoc review committee)
    -GE web site with updated syllabi
    -inclusion on bio-bib (meet with CAP)

prepared for web by H. Marcuse on May 4, 2003
back to top, UCSB GE Workgroup homepage