LAGER Committee Minutes 9-1-16

Final LAGER Minutes 9/1/16


Present: Kyle(chair), Suzanne, Melanie, Stephanie, Damon, Lavon, Damon, Drew (recording)


    1. Minutes from 8-25-16 were approved with minor edits
    2. Clerk of faculty will join LAGER at 9:45pm on 9-8-16
      1. Meeting will begin at 9:30am
    3. Debrief from 8-31-16 community meetings
      1. Committee needs a unified description of the curriculum
      2. Consider further developing our definition of Gateway, more clarity
      3. Suggestion to always begin a discussion of the curriculum with an overview
      4. Suggestion to update visuals including majors/minors so all parts of the curriculum are visually represented
      5. Reminder to include real connections to assessment
      6. Issues that needs framed for future community discussions
        1. What happens in the writing sequence?
          1. Sequence is important
          2. Sequence could take place in a variety of different places
        2. What happens to HP?
      7. Question about the balance of experiential vs. writing
        1. Visually writing sequence not as explicitly clear
        2. Suggestion for a final writing course as a stand alone
          1. Perhaps two credit swap b/t writing/experiential
      8. Suggestion to view current curriculum in in terms of outcomes – then map those outcomes on new curriculum
        1. Aid in visualization of new curriculum as new, and not just a rearranging of the old
    4. Stephanie, Suzanne, and Lavon will discuss assessment and the CiP charter and catalog documents
    5. Suggestion to include Gateway Seminar Details into the implementation plan


  • Damon will work on this


  1. Stephanie, Suzanne, and Lavon will meet to discuss how to map the old foundations on the new curriculum – linkages between Gateway and CiP’s
    1. GELO’s – now the only assessable outcomes – already agreed upon by faculty
    2. Not currently assessing old Foundations
    3. ACRL framework
  2. Competencies vs. GELO’s
    1. Foundation competencies from the old catalog have been integrated into the GELO’s
  3. Transfer students and students with AP credit
    1. Transfer students with associate’s degree exempted from GenEd
    2. AP credit – example language – would be exempt, would not encounter intercultural piece
    3. Possible to create other mechanisms to incorporate those competencies in other parts of the curriculum
    4. Or, students cannot test out
  4. Discussion of the mapping narrative document
    1. Organization
      1. Suggestion to create one page documents with links on
        1. Writing/writing sequence
        2. Gateway
        3. Place-based learning
        4. Community engagement
        5. Research
        6. Four year GenEd rationale
        7. Communities in Practice
          1. Specifically about thematic organization of GenEd programs
          2. Reference specific examples
        8. Practical, interdisciplinary (presentism, place, etc)
  5. Meeting closed at 11:30am