Minutes 6-7-2005

Policy Committee
Minutes
 June 7, 2005

Present: Jim Hicks, Kate Carney, Frost Johnson, Michael Warwick, Michael Sonnleitner, Jane Holman, and Porter Raper. Guests: Mary Lane Stevens and Matthew Hein.

Discussion :

The committee finalized the wording for the upcoming presentation of the prerequisite proposal to the EAC (for adoption). We focused on phrasing that regarding writing readiness, casual students, ENNL students, and a transition team for the implementation of the prereq policy. See the final version here on the PCC website: http://www.pcc.edu/resources/academic/eac/prerequisites.html

For the casual, non-degree-seeking student issue, we decided to have IR look at the number of requests to see the number of students who may be requesting waivers.

We also want to see the number of ENNL students affected by the policy, and we’ll ask IR for that information as well.

Transition team ideas and parameters:

  1. Representation from EAC/PC, student services, DE, math, writing, management, library staff.
  2. Communication to students is imperative.
  3. Communication to SACs about process and interim plans (ie., recommendation language in course description, etc.) as soon as fall 2005 SAC meetings.
  4. Ensure curriculum process is in place for opt-outs.
  5. Field more suggestions for casual/non-degree seeking student.
  6. Communication to high schools.

Anticipating a meeting coming up next Tuesday (6/14) with Susan Bach of IR, we discussed assumptions made by the initial IR investigation of the number of students affected by the prereq policy. We noted that most, if not many, of the modern language courses will likely opt-out of the policy, as will most studio art classes, and perhaps literature as well (which may opt out of a math requirement). We also want to ensure the current survey of courses does not include writing classes.

After ironing out the above details, we put the prereq proposal to bed until the EAC vote (on 6/8/05) and began discussing policy issues to tackle next year. Here’s what we came up with: the 5-year rule (for math and writing), the audit--P/NP grading policy, and the issue of all on-line degrees (for the latter, it is clear many faculty believe decisions regarding on-line degrees have been made without adequate inclusion.)