LAGER Committee Minutes 2/23/16

by Drew Haysin Curriculum Revisionon Posted on

Final LAGER Minutes 2/23/16

 

Present: Kyle(chair), Lavon, Melanie, Dale, Suzanne, Damon, Jennie, Caleb, Drew(recording)

 

    1. Meeting opened with a moment of silence 9:05am
    2. Minutes from 2/16/16 were approved with no edits.

 

  • Action Item – Drew will post to the MoonRoom site

 

  1. Senate President received and was enthusiastic about our suggestion for moving forward incorporating student voices on the Teams moving forward
  2. Feedback
    1. how to organize feedback from meetings with depts., emails, incubator events?
    2. discussed importance of archiving all feedback
  3. March Faculty Meeting Discussion
    1. Working Document in Google Drive
    2. Clerk has suggested we should seek some sort of approval or support from faculty of the general Footprint before moving into the heavy work of the smaller Teams
      1. Question as to how much detail to include. Too much detail will likely make the proposal unapprovable. Most details are not set, still up for much discussion
      2. Useful to have something approved in order to work towards gaining outside financial support/grants.
    3. Currently document is asking for a statement of support in the process moving forward, not in the footprint itself
    4. Suggestion to seek approval of the concept of the Footprint, not the footprint itself
      1. move away from discussion of courses and only talk about place based learning, space
      2. What will students be able to do? What will students know?
      3. Important to continue to explain and describe what communities of practice are/could be. And to explain how much flexibility this concept contains.
    5. We need to encourage exploration of the current model in order to discover productive feedback, instead of just asking for critiques
    6. Suggestion to continue to build trust around this process
    7. Clerk’s needs to know by Friday what we intend for next week’s faculty meeting so they can approve it.
      1. Discussion of what we really hope to achieve on March faculty meeting. What is realistic? Approval of general concept? Only provide feedback from the Lunch/Incubator session from 2/24?
  4. GELO’s
    1. problems with the current GELO’s, especially in terms of assessment, have been discussed previously in this committee
    2. more work needs to be done to align the footprint the current GELO’s
    3. minor adjustments to the GELO’s may need to be considered to promote better assessment
  5. Agenda Items for next week
    1. Senate Meeting 3/7/16
  6. Action Item
    1. new meeting time for this week – 8:30am-9:30am(ish…) Thursday
      1. will discuss March faculty meeting plan
  7. Meeting closed with a moment of silence 10:18am