COMMITTEE ON THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM (CUC)
Fourth Meeting/2003-04 Academic Year
November 20, 2003

PRESENT:  M.J. Blaschak (HHS/AHP, chair), N. Clifton (LAS/ENGL), S. Conklin (UCC, HHS/AHP), G. Conderman (EDUC/TLRN), C. DeMoranville (BUS/MKTG), J. Ferris (EDUC/KNPE, student), E. Goldberg (LAS/FLAL, student), M. Konen (LAS/GEOG), R. Newsom (VPA/THEA), E. Seaver (Vice Provost, ex officio), J. Thunder (LAS/MATH), D. Zinger (EET/ELE)

GUESTS:  N. Boubekri (IENG, chair), M. Tahernezhadi (EET, acting associate dean)

CONSULTANT:  K. Van Mol (Catalog Editor/Curriculum Coordinator)

COLLEGE MINUTES AND OTHER CURRICULAR ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

College of Engineering and Engineering Technology #1 revised

Van Mol clarified that many of the items in this set of minutes were approved by the CUC at its meeting last Thursday; the items up for discussion at this point were the addition of mission statements and program/educational objective statements.  Conderman moved, seconded by Clifton, TO APPROVE THE MISSION/EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS IN THE #1 MINUTES OF THE EET CURRICULUM COMMITTEE.  Seaver reported that he had met with Tahernezhadi and V. Cassidy (Associate Vice Provost for Academic Planning and Development) regarding accreditation standards and what other universities do in terms of publishing them.  They determined that there are already numerous examples in the Undergraduate Catalog (in the Colleges of Business and Health and Human Sciences) in which there are statements regarding a department or school’s mission and/or educational objectives/outcomes, although these do not appear with specific headings, as is being proposed by the EET.  Consequently, they decided that the precedent has already been set for what EET is proposing.  It could be that other departments/schools might want to consider adding such additional heading to their catalog copy.

Van Mol noted inconsistencies with the presentation of the information as proposed and usual catalog copy.  It was agreed she could fix these problems editorially.  DeMoranville stated that she was uncomfortable with the last paragraph in the Department of Technology’s mission statement, because it was more like marketing information as opposed to a mission statement.  Similarly, she thought that the last sentence in the first paragraph of this mission statement, referring to the history of the department, was also inappropriate.  Consequently, she made the friendly amendment to the original motion TO APPROVE THE MISSION/EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS WITH THE LAST SENTENCE OF THE FIRST PARAGRAPH AND THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY’S MISSION STATEMENT DELETED.  Conderman and Clifton had no objections to this friendly amendment, and the motion passed unanimously.

Proposed new course IENG 466, Design and Analysis of Supply Chains

Lengthy discussion took place regarding duplication issues with the proposed new course IENG 466, Design and Analysis of Supply Chains, and supply chain courses offered by the Department of Operations Management and Information Systems (OMIS).  Boubekri noted that the proposed IENG course would cover different topics in terms of content and the department would like the chance to develop a strength in the area of supply chains and logistics.  DeMoranville pointed out that the text used for the course is the same as that used for OMIS 340, and in the time of strained resources, such duplication should be examined.  However, there was a concern that OMIS 340 had prerequisites and a UBUS corequisite that IENG students might not have, but DeMoranville said that the department would be willing to waive these for IENG students.  During the course of this discussion it was revealed that the instructors of these two courses have not yet met to discuss the questions of duplication or possible crosslisting.  After further discussion, Goldberg moved, seconded by DeMoranville, TO TABLE CONSIDERATION OF IENG 466 UNTIL THE FEBRUARY CUC MEETING, WITH THE ADVICE THAT THE TWO FACULTY MEMBERS FROM OMIS AND IENG TALK WITH EACH OTHER AND PROVIDE A RESPONSE TO THE CUC PRIOR TO THAT MEETING.  The motion passed unanimously.

Addition of corequisite to COMD 403

Because this item was tabled at the last meeting, DeMoranville moved, seconded by Zinger, TO TAKE THE REVISION TO COMD 403 OFF THE TABLE.  The motion passed by consensus.  Blaschak reported that the Department of Literacy Education had agreed to the addition of the corequisite of ENGL 207 to COMD 403, under three conditions – that this corequisite is not added to LTLA 403X; that the Department of Literacy Education is not responsible for enforcing any corequisite for LTLA 403X; and that the faculty members who teach this course will meet annually to discuss the two courses.  Clifton moved, seconded by DeMoranville, TO APPROVED THE REVISION TO COMD 403.  The motion passed unanimously.

Revisions to TLSE 90

Van Mol reported that she had received an e-mail from D. Jackman, associate dean, College of Education, reporting that the Department of Teaching and Learning had decided to delete TLSE 90, a zero-credit-hour course which had been returned to them by the CUC last week.  Conklin moved, seconded by Goldberg, TO APPROVE THE DELETION OF TLSE 90, CONTINGENT ON APPROVAL OF THE EDUC CURRICULUM COMMITTEE.  The motion passed unanimously.

Deletions of FLSP courses

Clifton reported that she had spoken with the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures regarding courses an earlier set of LAS minutes reported were to be deleted.  She said that the department anticipates these deletions to come through next year; they wanted to keep them around so that students almost ready to graduate will be able to take them.
 

The meeting adjourned at 2:35 p.m.

The next CUC meeting will be on February 12, 2004, in Holmes Student Center 306 at 12:30 p.m.