Council on Undergraduate Education 2013-2014...2013/11/15 · Council on Undergraduate Education 2013-2014 CUE AGENDA Quorum: 13Date: November 15, 2013 (Friday) Location: Park Shops

Council on Undergraduate Education 2013-2014

CUE AGENDA Quorum: 13

Date: November 15, 2013 (Friday)

Location: Park Shops Room 201 Minutes Recorder:

Time: 1:30-3pm Gina Neugebauer

Call to Order

Guests: Karen Helm , SACS Accreditation Liaison, UPA Director; Dr. Pat Spakes , UPA Asst. Director

Presentation: Karen Helm and Pat Spakes

Approval of Minutes

Old Business - Discussion

▪ GEP Corequisites: US Diversity and Global Knowledge

Should a single course be permitted to satisfy both co-requisites (double-count)?

Should the co-requisite categories be merged into a single co-requisite?

▪ Comprehensive Articulation Agreement: Draft Proposal and Transfer Course list Link to survey

Courses for GEP Category - Review

Presenter: Reviewers GEP List Title: Pre-requisite(s)

McGowan Buie, Burton, Crockett NS MEA 101 Geology: Physical Rec. Co-req: MEA 110

McGowan Buie, Burton, Crockett NS MEA 110 Geology I: Physical Lab (L)Co-req: MEA 101 or Pre-req:

MEA 100,101,120,140 or 200

McGowan Hergeth, Morillo, Jur NS MEA 120 Dinosaurian World

McGowan Keene, Levine, Domingue NS MEA 130 Introduction to Weather & Climate For Non-Majors

McGowan Keene, Levine, Domingue NS MEA 135 Intro. to Weather & Climate Lab (L) Co-req: MEA 130

McGowan Stoller, Vick, Williams NS MEA 150 Environ. Issues in Water Resources (L)

McGowan Young, Parish, Hemenway NS MEA/BIO 220 Marine Biology MEA 200 or BIO 181

Other Business

▪ Approval of Minutes of the October 18, 2013 Meeting

Welcome and Introductions - Chair, Dr. James Knopp

Remarks from Dr. Barbara Kirby - Associate Vice Provost, Academic Programs and Services

▪ General Education as a Core Accreditation Requirement : SACS' Perspective and Other Institutional Gen Ed Programs

http://www.provost.ncsu.edu/governance/standing-committees/undergrad-education/2013-2014/agendas/

http://oucc.ncsu.edu/general-education

DRAFT DRAFT

1

CUE Minutes-October 18, 2013

341 Daniels Hall, Quorum: 13

Call to Order: 1:30pm

Voting Members Present (Quorum Present: 16)

Timothy Buie, Donna Burton, Peggy Domingue, Cynthia Hemenway, Helmut Hergeth, James Knopp, Cody Long, John Morrillo,

Cynthia Levine, Herle McGowan, Andy Nowel, David Parish, Aaron Stoller, Candace Vick, Paul Williams, Karen Young

Ex-Officio Non-Voting Members Present: Stephany Dunstan, Catherine Freeman, Barbara Kirby, Robert Warren, Carrie Zelna

Members Absent: Joshua Heitman (E), Karen Keene (E), Jessica Jameson (E), Michelle Johnson (E), Adam Rogers (E), Ingrid Schmidt (E)

Guests:

Vice-Chancellor and Dean Mike Mullen (Division of Academic and Studetn Affairs, DASA), Deborah Aker (General Shelton

Leadership Center) , Larry Blanton (Honors Program) , Jennifer Capps (NCSU Entrepreneurship Center), Julia Law (proxy for

Ingrid Schmidt), Mike Mullen (DASA), David Woodbury (proxy for Adam Rogers)

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

Welcome and Introductions:

Chair Knopp welcomed the committee, calling the meeting to order at 1:30pm. He welcomed the guests in attendance:

Stephany Dunstan (Office of Assessment), Larry Blanton (Honors Program), Deborah Aker (General Shelton Leadership

Center), and Jennifer Capps (NCSU Entrepreneurship Center).

Remarks from Associate Vice Provost Academic Programs and Services, Barbara Kirby:

Dr. Kirby welcomed Dr. Mike Mullen ,Vice-Chancellor and Dean of the Division of Academic and Student Affairs

(DASA)to the committee, and thanked him for suppporting the luncheon for CUE. She thanked the committee for all that

they do in their service to CUE and the university. Dr. Kirby welcomed Cody Long, the new Student Senate Representative

to the committee. She noted that she is looking forward to having the student perspective represented on the committee.

Additionally, Dr. Kirby met with the Academic Policy Committee last week, and discussed a variety of topics. She wanted to

see how this committee views the following questions about the GEP categories, noting the importance of the faculty

perspective: amount of courses, sections, separate co-requisites, and the possibility of a new category. The Academic Policy

Committee is currently mulling over these questions.

Dr. Kirby urged the committee to read the article provided by Jeanette Moore titled, “International and Diversity Offices

Look For Ways to Work Together”1 She noted that this article presented how the American Council on Education meeting

took up the topics of where offices were separate, how they operated in their separate towers, how international students and

main campus students interact to create cultural diversity. She hoped that this article would help the committee to start

discussing the USD and GK categories co-requisites. Dr. Kirby has the data concerning Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 GEP

courses including: seats available, seats occupied, number of courses, and number of sections. She will be sharing this with

the subcommittee as they move forward in their discussion about the GEP categories. At the next CUE meeting, November

15th, the SACS liaisons, Karen Helms and Pat Spakes, will attend to share their perspective of SACS view of general

education.

Remarks from Vice Chancellor and Dean, Mike Mullen:

Dr. Mullen thanked the committee for having him, noting the important work done by CUE. He noted that he is a member on

the UNC System General Education Council. The Council is composed of both faculty and administrators. Hans Kellner is

the faculty representative for NCSU on this committee. Dr. Mullen believes that the group’s name is a bit misleading. The

goal of the Council has less to do with general education, and more to do with learning outcomes at the system level. The

charge of UNC System General Education Council is, “Undertake a comprehensive review of existing general education

1 Karin Fischer, "International and Diversity Offices Look for Ways to Work Together," The Chronicle of Higher Education,

http://chronicle.com/article/InternationalDiversity/142465

DRAFT DRAFT

2

architecture, recommending a limited set of student learning outcomes appropriate to all UNC institutions...exploring

qualitative and quantitative methodologies appropriate to assessing these outcomes”. He noted that the initial report is due

back to President Ross in January. Dr. Mullen explained the different factors driving this charge. He noted that the current

legislature and Board of Governors want to know what the UNC System institutions provide to their students at the end of

their academic career. This is an opportunity at the system level to show the Board of Governors and the legislature that

UNC institutions are doing an amazing job. One of the activities that the Council has implemented is the institution-wide

survey request through the Faculty Senate listserv, asking what the critical student learning competencies in the view of the

faculty. Over 3,000 responses across the system were collected. Ten competencies emerged from the list; two that were

highly regarded: Critical Thinking and Written Communications. Five universities (Appalachian State, East Carolina,

Fayetteville State, UNC-Pembroke, and Western Carolina) are piloting the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+). This test

is put together with the purpose to measure critical thinking. Other assessments are being reviewed to see if they can be

implemented to assess students throughout the UNC system. For the qualitative assessments for students, there are thoughts

that should be multiple mobile methods of measurement. There is a growing emphasis on e-portfolios. An example can be

seen with Clemson University. There will be a request for proposals going out soon system-wide to have pilots for e-portfolio

work implemented at some universities.

Dr. Mullen noted that the General Education Program is important for accreditation and to show the UNC system that NCSU

works hard to provide students with an education that goes beyond their focus of study. NCSU needs to maintain a system

that provides excellent breadth of education to students. The GEP needs to show that it is addressing a well-developed set of

student competencies and outcomes. This also ties into an articulation agreement currently being drafted by the UNC-GA.

The articulation focuses heavily on the first two years of the undergraduate education. The UNC system recently emailed Dr.

Mullen asking for a review of a larger document. In this, there are forty one general education courses that faculty across the

system have agreed that would provide an adequate list of courses coming out of the community colleges that could transfer

into the four year institutions. If a student takes any of the forty one courses on the list, even if an equivalent course is not

offered at NCSU, it will be accepted to transfer as GEP credit. The amount of courses taken at the community college would

only fulfill the number of hours needed to fulfill the requirements at NCSU. As an example, Dr. Mullen used ART 111,

which would fulfill the humanities GEP. If in addition to ART 111 the student also took ART 114 and ENG 231, they would

only receive credit for the six hours of the Humanities GEP required for graduation. This will be sent to CUE to review as

well. Currently, if a student has an A.A. (Associate of Arts) or an A.S. (Associate of Science), they will be grandfathered in

as having already met the GEP requirements. As a junior, they will have finished their GEP requirements. Dr. Mullen

encouraged members of the committee to contact him if they have any questions or concerns. He would also be happy to

meet with faculty members ‘off line’. Dr. Mullen thanked the committee for their time and hard work.

Presentation of General Education Competency Assessment-ETS Proficiency Profile Results by Dr. Stephany Dunstan:

Dr. Zelna noted that over five hundred freshmen participated in the testing. Unfortunately, it was harder to find seniors

willing to take the instrument. The Office of Assessment asks the committee to consider having their senior students

participate in the test. Some faculty have volunteered for their students to participate in the testing during their Capstone

courses, as these courses have a majority of graduating seniors. Dr. Mullen noted that the lack of senior participation in

assessment is a key concern for the General Education Council. NCSU identified five competencies: Written

Communication, Oral Communication, Quantitative Literacy, Critical Thinking, and Creative Thinking. The QEP is focused

on assessing Critical and Creative Thinking. The Office of Assessment has been measuring the Written Communication, Oral

Communication, and Quantitative Literacy competencies. The Office of Assessment works to collect data efficiently,

knowing that the SACS review is coming.

Dr. Dunstan explained that the test is a thirty six part instrument, and takes students around forty minutes to finish. To

address the issue of motivation, the students fill out a Student Opinion Survey, using the supplemental questions provided by

James Madison University. Additionally, the exam was given on multiple days with multiple times available. Freshmen were

assessed in January, and seniors were assessed in April.The first finding showed the seniors outperformed freshman by

around ten points on a one hundred point scale. For both freshman and seniors, there is a majority who are not proficient in

critical thinking. Higher SAT scores and higher self-reported effort predicted higher scores. Dr. Dunstan emphasized that

longitudinal data is the most desired. The goal is the follow students from their freshman year to their senior year, tracking

their academic career. Since there was no longitudinal data, the Office of Assessment wrote a macro in SAS to match

freshman and seniors along the dimensions of: gender, college, and SAT Verbal and Math scores. They found 106 matches

http://www.clemson.edu/academics/programs/eportfolio/

DRAFT DRAFT

3

this way, and compared their scores on the sub-dimension, which confirmed the trend in the data that seniors score ten points

higher than freshman. Another issue at play is that of time. Some students take their GEP Mathematics courses as an

undergraduate senior, having not been in a math course since their freshman year of high school. This can affect the scores in

the assessment. The lack of longitudinal data means the analysis cannot focus on groups, majors, and colleges. The Office of

Assessment will be looking at the differences and similarities between STEM and non-STEM programs.

This information is given to SACS, and is a part of an extensive assessment plan. Additionally, the Office of Assessment will

be sharing the outcomes of the instrument college course and curricula committees, as well as other organizations on campus.

Dr. Dunstan asked committee members to consider providing assistance by encouraging students in their courses to

participate in the Critical Thinking Assessment Test.

Approval of Minutes from the October 4, 2013 Meeting:

A motion was made to approve the minutes from the October 4, 2013 CUE meeting, and was seconded. With some

minor edits regarding attributing comments to specific members, the motion was APPROVED unanimously.

Notification of Dropped Courses:

Presenter Course GEP List

Stoller HON 201: Inquiry, Discovery, and the Arts VPA

Stoller Hon 343: Philosophical Ethics HUM

Stoller HON 351: American Ideals in Global Perspective SS

Stoller HON 361: Eco-Realism: Human Nature, Politics, & Ecological Constraints IP

Stoller HON 362: Info. Technology, Society, and Academic Research IP

Stoller HON 371: Environmental Science and Technology IP

Courses for GEP Category-Special Topics Shell Offerings:

A motion was made and seconded to approve these courses as a package. The motion was approved unanimously. A motion

was made and seconded to approve the Honors GEP Special Topics Shell Courses as presented. One member asked for the

HON 293-001: The Politics of Modern Travel to be pulled for discussion. Without discussion, the motion to approve the

following was APPROVED.

Presenter Course GEP List Semester to Be Offered

Stoller HON 290-001: Social Movements of the Middle East HUM, GK Fall 2013

Stoller HON 290-002: Alexander the Great HUM, GK Fall 2013

Stoller HON 295-001: A History of Economic & Financial Crises SS Fall 2013

Stoller HON 295-002: Self, Schooling, & The Social Order SS Fall 2013

Stoller HON 296-001: Freedom and the Self IP, HUM Fall 2013

HON 293-001: The Politics of Modern Travel-APPROVED pending-unanimously.

Courses for GEP Category-Review

A motion was made and seconded to approve these courses as a package. The motion was approved unanimously. A motion

was made and seconded to approve the review of the courses for the GEP category as presented. Without discussion, the

motion to approve the following was APPROVED.

Presenter Course GEP List

Domingue HESD 274: Modern Dance I HES

Domingue HESD 275:Modern Dance II HES

Meeting adjourned at 2:51 pm.

Respectfully Submitted by Gina Neugebauer

GEP Co-requisites Global Knowledge and U.S. Diversity

• 0 credit hour requirement

• Satisfy by taking a course from the GK or USD list

• GK may be satisfied via a Study Abroad program

• Course on the GK and USD list vary in credit hour from 1-4

• A single course cannot double-count to fulfill both the USD and GK requirement

Current Standing

• Current guidelines established by a previous CUE committee state that a single course cannot double-count to fulfill both the GK and USD requirement.

• CUE has approved two courses that will satisfy either the GK and USD requirement.

• Currently, each course is only populating one list in SIS until CUE makes a determination

Motion

Possible Options to Resolve Business:

• Motion to allow a course to double-count and fulfill both the USD and GK requirement.

• Motion to affirm the current rule that a course cannot double-count to fulfill both USD and GK requirement.

Discussion

• How much course content reflective of the GEP category objectives is required for a course to meet the GEP requirement?

• Are there appropriate numbers of GK and USD course offerings for students to fulfill both requirements in a timely manner and with a varied selection of course options?

• How would this be implemented through SIS? • Is there a need to merge and/or redefine the

categories since original GEP implementation, 2009?

North Carolina State University is a land- grant university and a constituent institution of The University of North Carolina

Faculty Senate Academic Policy Committee Co-chairs J. Moore and M. Fuentes Campus Box 7621 Raleigh, NC 27695-7621

November 11, 2013 Dr. Barbara M. Kirby Academic Programs and Services Associate Vice Provost Park Shops 310, Box 7105 NCSU Campus Raleigh, NC 27695 Dear Dr. Kirby, The Faculty Senate Academic Policy Committee (APC) discussed the U.S. Diversity (USD) and Global Knowledge (GK) co-requisites. Recognizing these are zero hour General Education co-requisites and there are some courses that are on both the USD and the GK list, the APC supports having one course be able to meet both co-requisites. The course would not be on each list if it did not meet the learning outcomes, and the APC sees nothing wrong with one course being able to meet both outcomes. The APC also discussed whether or not we should merge USD and GK into one Cultural Appreciation co-requisite. The APC was in favor of this proposition, and comments included: • Multiculturalism can be in your own country or abroad. • The principles are similar for the two current co-reqs, and those values are important. • The zero credit hour co-requisites are a huge administrative challenge. The Academic Policy Committee is in favor of merging the two co-requisites into one. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Dr. Jeannette A. Moore, Alumni Distinguished Professor Co-chair, Faculty Senate Academic Policy Committee Department of Animal Science Phone: (919) 515-4010 NCSU Box 7621, 226A Polk Hall E-mail: [email protected] Raleigh, NC 27695-7621

An Equal Opportunity Employer

NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY STUDENT SENATE

93rd SESSION, 2013-2014

R XX 1

Resolution 61

A RESOLUTION TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT TO RECOMMEND CHANGES REGARDING THE US DIVERSITY AND GLOBAL KNOWLEDGE CO-

REQUISITES

Short Title: USD/GK Co-requisite Act Sponsors: Senator Carter (corresponding) Signatories: Referred to: Version: Introduced First Reading: 10/23/13 Second Reading: 10/23/13 WHEREAS, currently undergraduate students must satisfy two “no credit hour requirement” 1

Co-requisites named US Diversity (USD) and Global Knowledge (GK) in the 2 General Education Program (GEP); and, 3

4 WHEREAS, courses that satisfy these Co-requisites must be approved by a University Standing 5

committee and must fulfill the following criteria: 6 Each course in U.S. Diversity will provide instruction and guidance that help students to achieve at 7 least 2 of the following: 8 1. Analyze how religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientation, disability, and/or age 9

identities are shaped by cultural and societal influences; 10 2. Categorize and compare historical, social, political, and/or economic processes producing 11

diversity, equality, and structured inequalities in the U.S.; 12 3. Interpret and evaluate social actions by religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientation, 13

disability, and/or age groups affecting equality and social justice in the U.S.; 14 4. Examine interactions between people from different religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual 15

orientation, disability, and/or age groups in the U.S. 16 Each course in Global Knowledge will provide instruction and guidance that help students to achieve 17 goal #1 plus at least one of #2, #3, or #4: 18 1. Identify and examine distinguishing characteristics, including ideas, values, images, cultural 19

artifacts, economic structures, technological or scientific developments, and/or attitudes of 20 people in a society or culture outside the United States. 21 And at least one of the following: 22

2. Compare these distinguishing characteristics between the non-‐U.S. society and at least one other 23 society. 24

3. Explain how these distinguishing characteristics relate to their cultural and/or historical contexts 25 in the non-‐U.S. society. 26

4. Explain how these distinguishing characteristics change in response to internal and external 27 pressures on the non-‐U.S. society. 28

And, 29 30

WHEREAS, the Council on Undergraduate Education (CUE), as the committee with 31 jurisdiction over the GEP lists, has begun a discussion on the ability for one 32


93rd SESSION, 2013-2014

R XX 2

course to satisfy both Co-requisites and therefore double-count, as is stated in the 33 minutes from the CUE meeting on September 20, 2013; and, 34

35 WHEREAS, CUE is also investigating the possibility of combining the USD and GK Co-36

requisites into one Co-requisite or some other change to the current structure; and, 37 38 WHEREAS, the SG Academics Committee conducted a Survey to gauge student opinion, which 39

was advertised via Facebook, word of mouth, and a HOWL, that over 200 40 students of varying class status and colleges completed; and, 41

42 WHEREAS, the Survey indicated that 86% of students believe that classes should be allowed to 43

fill both Co-requisites at once; and, 44 45 WHEREAS, the Survey indicated that 78% of students believe that the USD and GK Co-46

requisites could be combined to one Co-requisite, as was evidenced by their 47 mixed responses to a question asking which of the above USD and GK criteria 48 applied to both the GK and USD classes taken; and, 49

50 WHEREAS, the Survey indicated that students on average found very few of the USD classes 51

appealing versus almost half of the GK classes; and, 52 53 WHEREAS, the vast majority of the open comments on the Survey expressed dissatisfaction 54

with the limited subjects for the USD classes particularly: 55 1. The small number of courses that satisfy the USD Co-requisite, making it 56

difficult to find classes of interest that fit into schedules 57 2. The narrow range of topics given the large focus on race and gender, despite 58

the growing movement to push diversity education beyond these two 59 categories 60

3. The lack of diversity in department and GEP cross listing, as many fall into 61 only the Social Sciences GEP; and, 62

63 WHEREAS, other comments on the Survey showed the perceived unfairness among majors for 64

their choices in filling the requirements, particularly the College of Management’s 65 M100, which satisfies the USD Co-requisite, unlike other introductory college 66 courses; and, 67

68 WHEREAS, the Survey indicated that the students’ average top priority when choosing classes 69

to fill their Co-requisites is not interest in the topic or the good reputation of the 70 class, but whether the class fits around their major courses; and, 71

72 WHEREAS, students who have little interest in a course may bring down the class by being 73

unruly or not participating, and may have a negative association with the subject 74 because of their frustrations with scheduling which could cause a net harm to 75 diversity education; and, 76

77


93rd SESSION, 2013-2014

R XX 3

WHEREAS, students who are not in CHASS majors communicated difficulty in finding courses 78 that count for the Co-requisites within their limited GEP and free elective space, 79 especially when AP and transfer credits are considered; and, 80

81 WHEREAS, students who are not in CHASS majors can better choose GEP courses that appeal 82

to them or are beneficial to their career plans and educational goals, resulting in a 83 more positive view of the liberal arts education, if they are not as restricted by the 84 necessity to fill multiple Co-requisites; and, 85

86 WHEREAS, the Student Senate and the Student Body recognizes the positive impact diversity 87

education can have on a population and the value of a liberal arts education; now 88 therefore be it, 89

90 RESOLVED, that the Student Senate recommends to CUE that the USD and GK Co-requisites 91

be combined to make a new Broader Views or diversity Co-requisite category 92 focusing on the commonalities in the criteria for the two Co-requisites such as 93 diversity and equality in other countries, past and present, in comparison to the 94 US; and be it further, 95

96 RESOLVED, that the Student Senate recommends to CUE that this new category have a large 97

list of courses (like the current GK Co-requisite) that satisfy it so that students can 98 find courses that they are interested in and will benefit from in order to increase 99 the overall value and environment of the classes; and be it further, 100

101 RESOLVED, that if a new Co-requisite is not created, the Student Senate recommends to CUE 102

that courses be allowed to double-count for both Co-requisites, but advises that 103 this will probably cause an increase in interest in these classes making them 104 difficult to get into; and be it further, 105

106 RESOLVED, that if a new Co-requisite is not created, the Student Senate recommends to CUE 107

that more courses be added to the USD Co-requisite as soon as possible to 108 increase positive associations with the Co-requisite and ease of scheduling; and be 109 it further, 110

111 RESOLVED, that if a new co-requisite is not created, Student Senate recommends that any 112

Foreign Language 101 or above be counted as Global Knowledge, 113 114 RESOLVED, that copies of this bill be sent to CUE Chair Dr. Jim Knopp, Vice Provost for 115

Academic Programs and Services Dr. José Picart, and Vice Chancellor and Dean 116 of the Division of Academic and Student Affairs Dr. Mike Mullen. 117

118 PASS 119

Initial Report Last Modified: 10/16/2013

1. What classification are you? # Answer

Response % 1 Freshman

27 10% 2 Sophomore

57 22% 3 Junior

75 29% 4 Senior

99 38%

Total 258 100%

Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 4 Mean 2.95 Variance 1.03 Standard Deviation 1.01 Total Responses 258

2. What college are you in? (Mark all that you have majors

in) # Answer

Response %

1 College of Humanities and Social Sciences

50 19%

2 Poole College of Management

21 8%

3 College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

36 14%

4 College of Design

6 2%

5 College of Education

8 3%

6 College of Sciences

49 19%

7 College of Natural Resources

8 3%

8 College of Textiles

11 4%

9

DASA (FYC and Environmental Sciences)

5 2%

10 College of Engineering

109 42%

Statistic Value Min Value 1 Max Value 10 Total Responses 259

3. Have you satisfied the US Diversity Co-requisite? # Answer

Response % 1 Yes

127 51% 2 No

123 49%

Total 250 100%


4. Did you satisfy the US Diversity Co-requisite with AP/IB or

transfer credit? # Answer

Response % 1 Yes

16 13% 2 No

104 87%

Total 120 100%


5. Did you have to take a class to fill this requirement that

did not fulfill another GEP or major requirement (excluding

free electives)? # Answer

Response %

1

Yes, I had to take a separate course for this requirement.

25 24%

2

No, I filled this requirement with a GEP course

64 62%

3

No, I filled this requirement with a major course

14 14%

Total 103 100%


6. Which course are you planning on using to satisfy the US

Diversity Co-requisite? (Course Number, i.e. ABC101) Text Response I'm not sure. AFS 260 MUS 206 STS 210 Hs428 AFS248 Rel 423 HON 296 PSY 406 MUS206 SOC 203 SOC204 Abroad REL320 AFS 346 SOC203 Soc 204 ENG249 ANT 252 Unknown PS 309 af436 WGS 210 HON 296 M100 AFS 346 WGS210 wgs 210 STS 325 STS210 SOC 204 I don't know Idk SOC204 PHI 325 HI462 M 100 ANT 254 REL320 HON346 STS 210 REL/HI 320 ars 354 MUS 206 undecided unknown eng 375

REL 323 MUS 260 not sure yet ps303 I can't remember what COM112 satisfies but I am currently enrolled in it. VPUS 295 SS204 M 100 HUMU 295 ? Not sure yet PRT 449 and 450 dk ENG 249 Native American Literature Not Sure HI447 WGS204 I don't know yet Soc200 SOC 104 AFS 201 I don't know yet ANT254 Unsure MUS206 Or one that is also a humanities HI 336 undecided AFS305 BME 325 (might be wrong on the #) Bio-medical Ethics SSC 428 soc 214 SOC203 ANT254 Unsure SOC 204 no idea None, I'm a grad student. WGS2xx HI 455

Statistic Value Total Responses 84

7. Have you satisfied the Global Knowledge Co-requisite? # Answer

Response % 1 Yes

167 74% 2 No

58 26%

Total 225 100%


8. Did you satisfy the Global Knowledge Co-requisite with

AP/IB or transfer credit? # Answer

Response % 1 Yes

48 30% 2 No

113 70%

Total 161 100%


9. Did you have to take a class to fill this requirement that

did not fulfill another GEP or major requirement (excluding

free electives)? # Answer

Response %

1

Yes, I had to take a separate course for this requirement.

27 24%

2

No, I filled this requirement with a major course.

15 13%

3

No, I filled this requirement with a GEP course.

71 63%

Total 113 100%


10. Which course are you planning on using to satisfy the

Global Knowledge Co-requisite? (Course Number, i.e.

ABC101) Text Response ANT 252 Already completed- HI 233 MEA100 - credit through AP Environmental Science IDS201 SOC204 Abroad Unknown Idk PRT 449,450 mus 360 undecided unknown not sure yet FLS340 STS323 Don't know yet. HON298 HI 252 ? Not sure yet PRT 449 and 450 dk Unknown FLF318 I don't know yet Not sure SOC 261 REL 312 Study abroad maybe? AFS305 STS323 Hi252 HI207 Unsure grad student undetermined ET 100 HI 216


11. Should the Co-requisites be full credit-necessary GEP

courses, like the Interdisciplinary Perspective GEP? # Answer

Response %

1 Yes, both should be.

29 14%

2 Global Knowledge should be.

17 8%

3 US Diversity should be.

1 0%

4 No, they should remain Co-requisites.

159 77%

Total 206 100%


12. How many of the classes appealed to you when you were

choosing a class to satisfy this Co-requisite?

# Question Almost none

A few About half

Many Almost

All Total

Responses Mean

1 US Diversity

117 58 13 11 2 201 1.62

2 Global Knowledge

51 63 29 37 8 188 2.40

Statistic US Diversity Global Knowledge Min Value 1 1 Max Value 5 5 Mean 1.62 2.40 Variance 0.82 1.44 Standard Deviation 0.90 1.20 Total Responses 201 188

13. Rank the following aspects from most to least

importance to you when deciding on a class to fill one of

these Co-requisites. How did you narrow down which class

to take?

# Answer 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total

Responses

1

Fits in my schedule around my major classes

53 68 53 16 16 1 207

2

Fulfills a course requirement in my major

67 38 36 24 21 21 207

3 Was an interesting topic to me

53 38 29 40 20 27 207

4

Had a good grade distribution or a reputation for being easy

21 33 35 27 43 48 207

5

Had a reputation for being a good class/professor

2 19 34 58 72 22 207

6

Had spots in the course when I registered

11 11 20 42 35 88 207

Total 207 207 207 207 207 207 -

Statistic

Fits in my schedule around

my major classes

Fulfills a course

requirement in my major

Was an interesting

topic to me

Had a good grade

distribution or a

reputation for being

easy

Had a reputation for being a good

class/professor

Had spots in the

course when I

registered

Min Value 1 1 1 1 1 1 Max Value 6 6 6 6 6 6 Mean 2.41 2.79 3.08 3.88 4.18 4.66 Variance 1.44 2.88 2.97 2.85 1.36 2.24 Standard Deviation

1.20 1.70 1.72 1.69 1.17 1.50

Total Responses

207 207 207 207 207 207

14. Do you think that classes should be allowed to count for

both Co-requisites? So by taking one class, you can fulfill

both? # Answer

Response % 1 Yes

179 86% 2 No

30 14%

Total 209 100%


15. Do you think the Co-requisites are similar enough that

they should be combined to only one Co-requisite? # Answer

Response % 1 Yes

160 78% 2 No

46 22%

Total 206 100%


16. Course

# Question US Diversity Global

Knowledge Total Responses

1

Analyzed how religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientation, disability, and/or age identities are shaped by cultural and societal influences

37 27 64

2

Categorized and compared historical, social, political, and/or economic processes producing diversity, equality, and structured inequalities in the U.S.

30 18 48

3

Identified and examined distinguishing characteristics, including ideas, values, images, cultural artifacts, economic structures, technological or scientific developments, and/or attitudes of people in a society or culture outside the United States.

22 37 59

4

Compared these distinguishing characteristics between a non-U.S. society and at least one

17 35 52

other society.

5

Explained how these distinguishing characteristics relate to their cultural and/or historical contexts in a non-U.S. society

17 29 46

6

Explained how these distinguishing characteristics change in response to internal and external pressures on a non-U.S. society.

13 26 39

7

Examined interactions between people from different religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientation, disability, and/or age groups in the U.S.

36 13 49

8

Interpreted and evaluated social actions by religious, gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientation, disability, and/or age groups affecting equality and social justice in the U.S.

37 13 50

Statistic

Analyzed how religiou

s, gender

, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orienta

tion, disabili

ty, and/or

age identities are shaped

by cultural

and societa

l influen

ces

Categorized and

compared

historical,

social, political, and/or econom

ic process

es produci

ng diversit

y, equality

, and structur

ed inequalities in

the U.S.

Identified and

examined distinguis

hing characteri

stics, including

ideas, values, images, cultural

artifacts, economic structures

, technolog

ical or scientific developm

ents, and/or

attitudes of people

in a society or

culture outside

the United States.

Compared these

distinguishing

characteristics

between a non-U.S.

society and at

least one other

society.

Explained how these

distinguishing

characteristics

relate to their

cultural and/or

historical contexts in a non-

U.S. society

Explained how these

distinguishing

characteristics

change in

response to

internal and

external pressure

s on a non-U.S. society.

Examined

interactions

between

people from

different

religious,

gender, ethnic, racial, class, sexual orientat

ion, disabilit

y, and/or

age groups in the U.S.

Interpreted and

evaluated

social actions

by religiou

s, gender


tion, disabili

ty, and/or

age groups affectin

g equality and social justice in the U.S.

Min Value

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Max Value

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Total Responses

43 35 43 38 35 29 37 38

17. Course # Question US Diversity Total Responses

1


27 27

2


21 21

3


15 15

4

Compared these distinguishing characteristics between a non-U.S. society and at least one other society.

13 13

5


13 13

6

Explained how these distinguishing characteristics change in response

11 11

to internal and external pressures on a non-U.S. society.

7


27 27

8


24 24

Statistic


s, gender


tion, disabili

ty, and/or


by cultural

and societa

l influen

ces

Categorized and

compared

historical,


ic process

es produci

ng diversit

y, equality

, and structur

ed inequalities in

the U.S.

Identified and

examined distinguis

hing characteri

stics, including



, technolog


ents, and/or

attitudes of people

in a society or

culture outside

the United States.

Compared these

distinguishing

characteristics

between a non-U.S.

society and at

least one other

society.

Explained how these

distinguishing

characteristics

relate to their

cultural and/or


U.S. society

Explained how these

distinguishing

characteristics

change in

response to

internal and

external pressure


Examined

interactions

between

people from

different

religious,


ion, disabilit

y, and/or


Interpreted and

evaluated

social actions

by religiou

s, gender


tion, disabili

ty, and/or

age groups affectin


Min Value

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Max Value

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Total Responses

27 21 15 13 13 11 27 24

18. Course # Question Global Knowledge Total Responses

1


27 27

2


11 11

3


36 36

4

Compared these distinguishing characteristics between a non-U.S. society and at least one other society.

22 22

5


28 28

6

Explained how these distinguishing characteristics change in response

19 19

to internal and external pressures on a non-U.S. society.

7


13 13

8


11 11

Statistic


s, gender


tion, disabili

ty, and/or


by cultural

and societa

l influen

ces

Categorized and

compared

historical,


ic process

es produci

ng diversit

y, equality

, and structur

ed inequalities in

the U.S.

Identified and

examined distinguis

hing characteri

stics, including



, technolog


ents, and/or

attitudes of people

in a society or

culture outside

the United States.

Compared these

distinguishing

characteristics

between a non-U.S.

society and at

least one other

society.

Explained how these

distinguishing

characteristics

relate to their

cultural and/or


U.S. society

Explained how these

distinguishing

characteristics

change in

response to

internal and

external pressure


Examined

interactions

between

people from

different

religious,


ion, disabilit

y, and/or


Interpreted and

evaluated

social actions

by religiou

s, gender


tion, disabili

ty, and/or

age groups affectin


Min Value

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Max Value

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Total Responses

27 11 36 22 28 19 13 11

19. Comments/Concerns that were not addressed in the

survey may be written here. Text Response I think on a whole it is not practical to "teach" diversity in a class but rather indicate the importance of diversity around campus so that we are immersed in it. Additionally I think most of the course options for these Co-Reqs are unappealing to students in STEM majors. Personally I would be more inclined to learn something from a class I felt I would use later on instead of just taking up time in my schedule with a random history or literature course that I'll get me grade and then never think about again. Among the USD course selection, there is a remarkably narrow view of diversity, focusing on women and racial and religious minorities. USD should allow consideration of rural vs urban cultural differences, Western versus Eastern European ancestory, ageism, liberal arts vs STEM, etc... Effectively, if you are not a woman or part of a racial or religious minority, our course selection seems to falsely suggest that you do not contribute to the diversity on campus and in the US. Also, consider making more 1 hour options available for these courses, like the M 100 class. I think the co-requisite status should also be allowed for classes who spend an extended amount of time on the subject. Such as a 4-6 week course topic about US Diversity. Otherwise, there is no point in having it as a co-requisite. You're asking an entire class to be be based on that subject, so it would be just another GEP category. However, I think that keeping it as a co-requisite is important so as not to overload the GEPs. I like being able to choose from a wide variety of classes, and I feel like US Diversity is definitely the weaker category. I think you need to re-examine and try to allow more classes that cover a topic that fits the requirements. When choosing a class from that category, I felt trapped in my choices. The co-requisite forces your hand in some cases if you don't have any free electives available (such is the case if you have more than one major or have a minor). You have to take a course in a GEP category that also satisfies the requirements, and so it limits the pool of classes you can choose from. I think it's important to keep USD and GK separate because I feel it is important as a society to know ourselves, and to know our peers. US Diversity isn't diverse. I would love to learn about Japanese Americans during World War 2 or Minority Religions in America. Women, African Americans, and Native Americans should not be (pretty much) my only choices. If US Diversity were more diverse like Global Knowledge, I would be much happier and more willing and excited to take the courses. On a side note--diversity isn't just sex and race. I think they are a waste of time and take time and energy and money away from courses that are actually pertinent to my degree and my major. I think the U.S Diversity needs to be done away with. This requirements relates diversity to the classes nobody wants to take but is forced to, which I believe leads to a resentment of these courses and in turn a resentment of the idea of diversity. This is just my opinion. Many of the US diversity courses are not interesting and those that are interesting require prerequisites in the field of study. The one that I remember was a 300 level History The GEP has miles of room for improvement. I understand that NC State wants their students to graduate with a "well rounded" education, but the GEP has very little to do with that in my personal experience. Yes, I realized that I did not want to be a philosophy major, but I should not have to pay several hundred dollars for that realization. If we, the students, had more options for classes to fulfill these requirements, I would not be so bitter about wasting my money on an introductory liberal arts class that meant absolutely nothing to my education. I would have loved to take some forestry or fisheries classes, but instead I will probably end up taking some sort of African American studies course. I hope this helps.

These courses usually have a liberal bias in their stances, and they are not terribly useful for engineers. They are easy though, so they help the GPA of anyone who can write to an instructor's liking. I think it would be worthwhile for the diversity classes to be on the same level as the interdisciplinary, but I voted to keep them as co-requisites because, speaking as someone studying engineering, some students do not have the time to fulfill two more classes. It is really difficult to find which classes fulfill what requirements - a search engine having options for the required GEP classes, esp. those discussed in this survey would be highly beneficial. I hated these classes and they were a waste of time and money. I feel like many of the US Diversity/ Global Knowledge courses are more of a burden to take rather than it is worth to be forced to take. It is seen as just that-- something we are forced to take. At the university level, students should be more focused on fulfilling their major requirements and developing further knowledge into topics that truly interest them and that will carry them further through their academic and career goals. I feel that the way the US Diversity/ Global Knowledge courses are at this time, it is not working to do anything as such. Even thought there are so many number of classes offered for USD co-req , most of them can be grouped into similar categories. It is possible for a student to have no interest in any of the resulting catgories. It is harder to find one in other disciplines as a large number of them fall in Humanities. Students should always be allowed to choose a class that fulfills a major requirement otherwise it's wasted time and money I do not think that either the US Diversity or Global Knowledge co-requisites should be required for graduation. I think that it is great to have these classes available for people who are interested in them or who need them as a requirement for their major. However, requiring them for every student is a bit ridiculous. When I graduate with an engineering degree from one of the best engineering schools in the nation, having taken a diversity class will not influence which job offers I receive. As you know, NCSU is a very diverse school with a diverse campus. I do not need to pay for, or participate in, a course about African Americans or women to realize and appreciate that. My complaints are not only directed towards these co-requisites but all of the GEP requirements. Instead of educating students a mile wide and an inch deep, how about educating us an inch wide and a mile deep. Would you really care if the man that designed the air bag in your vehicle took a humanities class in college? No, you only want to know that he can make a damn good air bag. One of the more pointless and time consuming requirements. Would be best if they were removed. I find it interesting that within the US Diversity requirements, there are no classes for the average caucasian males. It seems unfair that white males should have to take a class on other races or genders, while those who are female or of a different ethnicity can take one on their own features, making it more relevant and applicable for them. Basically, the closest that you can come to not taking a topic dealing with women or race is a religion class. It is a fact that caucasian males are losing majority and other races and/or genders are beginning to be more of a majority. Due to this fact, it seems like there should be a class dealing with "White" or male history, psychology, or philosophy, or literature for those who would like to diversify themselves in this way. Most people I know still haven't fulfilled their US Diversity while the majority have Global Knowledge I think they should be eliminated The main problem with these courses is that usually the ones that I want to take are offered so rarely that I end up just having to take a class that fits my schedule, not one that I actually want to take.

There aren't enough classes that furfill the u.s. diversity requirement that are not studying African Americans or women. There is much more to the diversity of the united states then those two categories: gender and race. I think the university should be understanding to students switching majors to allow certain courses that may not usually classify as wither of the corequisites count towards them when the student is already behind schedule for their new major. If science and engineering majors are required to take classes in the humanities and social sciences in order to make us more 'holistic' individuals, then, humanities and social science majors should be required to take three semesters of calculus and two semesters of physics so that they too can be 'holistic'. Whatever that means. That, that is my opinion. Most of these GEP classes are not ones that I would ever be willing to take on my own. They are topics that do not appeal to me and just take up unnecessary space in my schedule (I am a double major with a minor. There is NO extra space in my schedule for excess classes.) Thankfully I was able to fulfill Global Knowledge with a class for my minor. I strongly feel that these classes should remain co-requisites. As a future educator I am very thankful for the diversity requirements that are a part of our University. The requirement provides more resources for me as an educator to discuss diversity and its effects on our classrooms than would have otherwise been available to me. I think more classes should satisfy these requirements. There are a lot of classes I took before choosing engineering that I feel satisfy the "goals" of these credit requirements but aren't on the list. I thought the co-requisites were easy to accomplish, although there weren't too many classes on each list that I found interesting. I don't think they should be full credit, though,as students already have enough credits to fill as it is. Honestly, they are a pain to have to take, especially for majors like Engineers who might not like any of the topics. It is truly frustrating to take courses that satisfy a major requirement, another GEP requirement and a co req but only be able to count one of those three things. Because of this loophole, I have a few extra classes I will be required to take on subjects I have limited interest in. The odds of me being able to fit in interesting classes that fulfill the requirement and my lab heavy schedule (meaning huge blocks of time are allocated for major classes, harder to fit in oddball courses) are slim to none so I have decided I will probably be stuck in something I have no care to be in whatsoever. Course selection for US Diversity courses need to focus on demographics other than African Americans or women. This really marginalizes course selection for those not interested in these topics. These two types of classes should not be required for science degrees. They were a huge waste of time, effort and money for me. Intro to African American Music was one of my favorite classes out of my entire career at State. It was fun and interesting, and I learned a lot about culture and music throughout the history of the United States. There at the very least needs to be a greater selection of US Diversity courses, most of them were not appealing topics (disregarding appealing times/grade distributions) I have no idea what this survey was about. These classes were a waste of my time. They required minimal effort and attention, but my time could be better spent taking another major course or pursuing research research opportunities. I decided my US diversity because I could complete four requirements with that one class. Although I happened to be interested in the topic, I would have taken any class that fulfilled this many requirements no matter what the topic/quality/class was. N/A I did not like any of the US Diversity classes that there were offered. I therefore chose my

Honors Seminar to be a US Diversity credit. The US Diversity classes offered need to be better. More foreign language courses should count towards GEP credit - there is nothing more "diverse" than being able to communicate with someone new! Foreign language should be more encouraged because not only do you learn how to speak the language, but in the process you learn about the culture of its native speakers. As foreign countries continue to develop, the need to truly learn a new language becomes a necessity in today's society. The point of an education is that it helps you to think for yourself. Sadly, in my experience many of the GEP courses offered seem to be more interested in promoting a certain worldview than teaching us how to think for ourselves. This is dispicable and evil. A foreign language actually offers a broader view of the world AND a skill practical to all fields of stufdy, thus making it better at promoting General Education and furthering students' own educational and career endeavors. Frankly, many of the GEP's offered appear to be a complete waste of time because anyone who has already learned to think for themselves (the purpose of college) can educate themselves through reputable general media sources available online, in the library, or on TV. That is a waste of North Carolina's, the students', and the parents' money, time, and effort. I feel that the co-requisites are not necessary and simply complicate the scheduling process. Sometimes its hard to find US-Diversity classes that fit my schedule and what I need to take. I have one GEP class left. And it has to be Humanities, but it would help if it also was US-Diversity. But there are not many options that meet both requirements. Students from diverse backgrounds should not be made to take these courses. I think that honestly the global knowledge co-requisite is fine as it is since there are a wide variety and a huge selection of classes that would satisfy it. However, the US Diversity co-requisite has many problems in my opinion, the main one being (somewhat ironically) that the classes that satisfy it do NOT have a diverse variety of subject matters at all. What makes this lack of variety worse is the fact that there are only about 40 classes that will satisfy this co-requisite. I think that there needs to be a lot more variety in the class choices, and there just need to be more classes in general that will satisfy this co-requisite.


Documents

Council on Undergraduate Education 2013-2014...2013/11/15 · Council on Undergraduate Education 2013-2014 CUE AGENDA Quorum: 13Date: November 15, 2013 (Friday) Location: Park Shops