GEGB Meeting October 21 2015

Meeting Details

Brenda Helmbrecht, Bruno Giberti, Neal MacDougal, Greg Fiegel, Emily Fogle, Katherine O'Clare, John Jasbinek, Thomas Saywer (ASI)

Concise, met objectives and criteria
Needs to be writing intensive 50% of grade, 3000 words (CR3), explanation of assessment, 40% of grade from writing assignments in proposal
Prerequisites, Area A, two lower-division in Area D (need to add to course proposal in course description)
Consensus to approve for D5, possible example of good proposal
Does Library review the GE courses? Information Literacy questions/consultation with library on work flow, no memo, generally two weeks to reply or respond

Ongoing review of curriculum proposals: catalog cycle proposals and continuous course review proposal.
GE program review.
Explore “course renewal” cycle (in tandem with ASCC). Put on agenda during fall 2015. Sent Gary Laver draft renewal process, and information from other college proposals. There is a university-wide effort in progress.
Pathways Discussion
Library vs. PCS GE committee representation

Examine impact of Quarter Plus courses (in tandem with ASCC).
Background: These courses have been implemented by Extended Education during summer months. These courses are three weeks long.
Students are in class from 9 to 3 every day.
These are 4-unit classes.
Is it appropriate for GE to ask for syllabi in these courses?
How can GE Learning Objectives - especially in Writing Intensive classes--be met in three weeks?
How can GEGB be more involved in the process?
Should GEGB meet with Extended Education to improve communication?

ECON 303 has 68 students in two sections. Should GEGB review how well the course can meet the writing-intensive goals? Should we wait for the renewal process to be developed?