Teaching and Learning Academy



Teaching and Learning Academy

Study Group Highlights February 12-14, 2003

➢ Interviews and discussion this week were centered on “Messages for the Task Force”

OBSERVATIONS about the Gen Ed process that are worth the Task Force’s notice:

1. A number of faculty who are supportive of gen ed changes express concern that the purposes for gen ed reform are still not clear. (This concern came up in the faculty forum as well.)

2. There continues to be misunderstanding about the process, e.g. a number of faculty thought choice was between two models only, not that a blend or another option was possible.

3. College reorganization fall-out continues to be felt, and the resulting culture of fear and trepidation has caused many faculty to perceive that the whole process has been “scripted” and also to worry how Gen Ed reform will be “used” to change department funding.

4. Resources are key, and some wonder how realistic wholesale changes are in this economic climate and given the world situation.

5. It seems as if the process has just finally alerted faculty to the need for conversation about GUR – just now starting to pay attention.

6. There continue to be structural issues that confound gen ed reform efforts, most notably the observation by many faculty that the current tenure and review process does not credit efforts to improve pedagogy or interdisciplinary work, such as the TLA.

7. There is a strong sentiment in TLA that having more opportunities for building community and

communicating across areas is urgently needed. Faculty don’t really understand the student

experience; students don’t understand faculty lives, etc. Hard to decide on gen ed with this gap.

RECOMMENDATIONS to the Task Force:

1) Don’t rush the process. Use all the time we have. Too many faculty seem to be just coming into the conversation. Have more faculty talk in interdisciplinary groups and come to some consensus about what is and isn’t working with GURs.

2) It’s hard to make large scale changes. Maybe phase in some changes (like strands and clusters) as departments want to do them.

3) Reconsider the perception that we need one model for everyone, rather than allowing for options giving a more flexible model based on student choices (would also facilitate integrating transfer students who need to complete GURs.)

4) As part of the reform: address the strong student perception that GERs are not relevant/useful to their majors or lives, i.e. have a first-year seminar that instructs students on the value of a liberal arts education. Another idea was to have a “Critical Conversations” seminar for first and second-year students that examine their roles as learners in the context of the higher education system (like University 397, “Learning Reconsidered)

5) Seriously consider the proposals that have emerged and the strong sentiments expressed for keeping an explicit diversity requirement and enhancing the writing and communication requirement.

6) Put some automatic review process into the proposal, so we don’t wait decades to change GURs again. Build in a periodic “step back” to examine whole structure and ask if it is working Administration/Task Force should address concerns about resource re-allocations and budget commitments to Gen Ed before going much further; otherwise, the resource scare will continue to cloud the issues.

7) Administration/Task Force should address concerns about resource re-allocations and budget commitments to Gen Ed before going much further; otherwise, the resource scare will continue to cloud the issues.

QUESTIONS for the Task Force:

1) What are the core problems that need to be addressed with Gen Ed reform? And how might the Task Force revisit these reasons and communicate them to the broader campus?

2) How does the Task Force envision addressing advising issues related to GURs?

3) What would the Task Force say to students who are concerned that even though the total credits for the GUR will likely be reduced, will the classes they need and want be available?

4) How many respondents have expessed a strong interest in having interdisciplinary opportunities in the GUR?

5) To what extent do faculty seem to want to reform gen ed at all? Is it primarily for the students?

6) What provisions have been made to accommodate needs of transfer students in changes to the GURs? To international students?

7) How might the Task Force respond to the conspicuous concern raised by many faculty that they are

“being ignored in decision making” and help facilitate a genuine dialogue between administration

and faculty about resources and expectations so an effective Gen Ed reform can be implemented?

8) Has the TLA had any influence on the process of reforming Gen Ed? If so, how?

8) How will the Task Force prioritize all the input they have received from the TLA and various

others, and what will they do next?

* 38 people participated in TLA study groups this week: 16 students, 15 faculty, 5 administrators, and 1 staff.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download