web.csulb.eduweb.csulb.edu/.../GEGRPolicyDRAFTGEGCComments.docx · Web viewof knowledge from a variety of disciplines so that students can lead engaged and meaningful lives exemplifying

California State , Long BeachPolicy StatementPolicy Number: XXX

Date: XXX

POLICY ON GENERAL EDUCATION ANDCAMPUS-SPECIFIC GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS

(GEGR Policy)

(This policy supersedes Policy Statements 12-00, 08-00, 00-00, 98-00, 96-00, 91-00 (Rev.) (1994), 91-00, 87-01, 83-04 supplements #2 (1987) and #1 (1985), 83-04, 81-11 amended (1988), 81-11 amended

(1985), 81-11 supplement #1 (1982), 81-11, 80-06 supplements #3 (1987), #2 (1987), and #1 (1983), 80-06, 79-28, 79-20, 79-16, 78-23, 77-29, 76-04, 75-02, 73-09, 73-05, 72-15, 72-03, 71-23, 71-21.)

This policy statement was recommended by the Academic Senate on XXXand approved by the President on XXX.

Table of Contents:1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 STRUCTURE OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM 3.0 SUBJECT AREA DISTRIBUTION, COURSE CONTENT, AND INSTRUCTION CRITERIA IN GENERAL

EDUCATION PROGRAM3.1 General Criteria 3.2 Lower-Division Courses

3.2.1 Area A, English Language Communication and Critical Thinking 3.2.2 Area B, Scientific Inquiry and Quantitative Reasoning 3.2.3 Area C, Arts and Humanities 3.2.4 Area D, Social Sciences 3.2.5 Area E, Lifelong Learning and Self-Development

3.3 Upper-Division General Education Courses 4.0 CAMPUS-SPECIFIC GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS

4.1 General Criteria 4.2 Skills-Based Campus-Specific Graduation Requirement

4.2.1 Writing-Intensive Course (Category WI) 4.3 Content-Based Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements

4.3.1 Course in Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the US (Category RE) 4.3.2 Course in Global Knowledge and Engagement (Category GK)

5.0 CONCENTRATIONS 6.0 GENERAL REGULATIONS 7.0 UNIT REDUCTIONS IN HIGH-UNIT MAJORS 8.0 GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR RETURNING AND TRANSFER STUDENTS 9.0 GOVERNANCE OF THE GEGR PROGRAM AND REVIEW OF COURSES 10.0 COURSE LIST APPEAL PROCEDURES

1.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 Preamble Students at CSULB earn highly valued degrees by completing at least two programs: their degree program (major) and CSULB’s GEGR Program, which includes the General Education (GE) Program and the campus-specific graduation requirements (GR). While the major focuses on discipline-specific education and sometimes prepares students for specific professions, the GEGR Program teaches a base

123456789

101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748

Tiffini Travis, 09/12/18,

This is the GEGC version of the GEGR DRAFT Policy. Please comment on the policy and we will be reviewing the next two meetings on September 24 and October 8. This document is for committee member comments only.


worked great thanks

Danny Paskin, 09/13/18,

Testing fro my cell phone. Danny.

of knowledge from a variety of disciplines so that students can lead engaged and meaningful lives exemplifying our CSULB values of intellectual rigor, inclusive excellence, and the public good. In the liberal arts tradition, the GEGR Program introduces students to new areas and gives them knowledge and skills that may or may not be related to their disciplines, rather than primarily complementing the major directly or catering to students’ preexisting interests.

The GEGR Program exposes students at CSULB to general knowledge across various disciplines with the appropriate approaches, methodologies, and pedagogies, and equips students to draw connections between those disciplines. Furthermore, in the GEGR Program students learn transferable skills such as, but not limited to, oral and written communication, quantitative reasoning, critical thinking, and problem-solving. These skills allow them to achieve their initial professional goals, and to be successful in future careers that have not even been dreamed of yet. By conveying this knowledge and these skills, the GEGR Program gives students the opportunity to become well-informed, well-rounded, intentional, and thoughtful citizens of their diverse local, national, and global communities.

1.2 Governing Documents CSU Executive Order 1100 on General Education Breadth Requirements (EO 1100) states that the total number of GE units required shall not be fewer or greater than 48 semester units, except when 49 units are allowed as described in Section 3.2.2.1 below. The Executive Order is issued pursuant to several sections of Title 5, California Code of Regulations.

1.3 Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements In addition to the GE Program as governed by EO 1100, CSULB identifies three campus-specific graduation requirements that students must complete. These are one writing-intensive class, one class in the area of racial and ethnic diversity in the United States of America (US), and one class in the area of global knowledge and engagement.

1.4 GEGR Learning Outcomes In order to be certified in a particular GE Area or Subarea and/or Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements (GR), courses must have Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) that are aligned with that specific GE Area or Subarea and/or the Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements. A separate implementation document defining GEGR SLOs will be approved by the Academic Senate in its initial iteration and subsequently maintained by the GEGC (General Education Governing Committee) and the GRGC (Graduation Requirements Governing Committee), respectively.

1.5 Terminology Where the term “GE Program” (capitalized) is used, it refers only to General Education Courses as governed by EO 1100; the term “GEGR Program” (capitalized) refers to the GE Program and Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements (GR).

1.6 Commitment to GEGR Program In addition to periodic review of courses and program assessment, the University’s commitment in several other areas is important to the health of the GEGR Program. These areas include the following:

faculty development and curricular innovation and improvement, including programs that offer incentives for faculty involvement in the GEGR Program;

support for initiatives designed to create learning communities; provision of adequate numbers of course sections at times that meet student needs and in

patterns that permit the formation of learning communities;

495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

(support = time &/or money &/or personnel)


This is all language from our original policy.

Kenji Klein, 09/22/18,

What exactly do we mean by this?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

Release time or stipends to develop courses or pathways, in collaboration with other academic units, that fulfill these requirements. (Who has time to do this on top of everything else required during the semester?)

Josh Palkki, 09/21/18,

Incentives? for example?

Birgit Penzenstadler, 09/20/18,

I agree these areas are important, but I don't understand what the purpose of this sentence is. Are we asking for buy in (committment) from the other stakeholders named in here? Maybe we can add a sentence to make that explicit?


We have a draft of the GE SLOs document- it hasn't been introduced yet because it will most likely be modified once the entire GEGR policy is approved by senate. I am happy to share but didn't want to add confusion to the process of reviewing the policy. The plan was to introduce it after the policy comments are given to AS after our October 8 meeting.


I have a hard time understanding how we can approve a policy requiring students to take courses in specific areas when we don't actually have a document that tells us what they are supposed to be learning in those areas.


This narrowing of the definition of diversity is problematic for reasons I outline in comments to item 4.3.1

Peter Kreysa, 09/20/18,

Maybe delete this from the GE Policy: MAIN/KEY ISSUE. This brings the total units required in GE and these campus requirements to 57. This is excessive and will result in increased unit requirements and likely increase time to degree. These should be removed altogether. Further, specific to the writing requirement, students are already required to complete 9 units of English (oral, written, and critical thinking). The language within this document states that written communication components of the GE requirement in English are to “develop students’ proficiency in written communication in English.” Hence it would appear writing is already elsewhere within GE. As to the other areas diversity and global engagement, see notes below relative to the limited scope of these courses and need for removal or substantial revision. This content is best infused within the majors, with programs responsible for incorporating ACROSS their curriculum and not within a single class.

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

KEY: This is where we could restate our LB values of intellectual rigor, inclusive excellence, and common good. e.g. "To fulfill of our campus value of intellectual rigor, students must complete a writing-intensive course. To fulfill our value of inclusive excellence, students must complete a course in the area of racial and ethnic diversity in the United States of America, and to fulfill our value of the public good, students must complete a course in the area of global knowledge and engagement."


The short answer is that the EO1100 is making all CSUs take these out of the GE and making them create "campus-wide requirements". The language that may work here is to state that they are core values and skills central to the mission of the university.


I agree.


Why? I am sure there is a good reason, and I think it would be valuable to inform readers about the rationale here, why we want more than what the GE policy requires..


How do we know then? I'd be prefer to be careful with an assumption like that, even though I like the sound of the idea.


"will assist in allowing..."?


From the perspective of educational literature, the point of GE is to learn about things outside of the discipline and apply them to the discipline. It is the integrative learning approach and an SLO in the Essential Skills LEAP framework.


I am not sure we are facilitating or requesting instructors to do that with the policy. Should we be stating this? Giving insight yes, but equip to connect?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

rather than "have not yet even been dreamed of yet." how about "may not yet exist." (The section could benefit from some tighening up. It reads like a committee compromise.)


I read it as gaining skills outside of the major and a chance to explore content that is not necessarily in their disciplines. Please think of language that states this more clearly.


Also unnecessary and interpretive as to the purpose of GE. So if a math student comes to campus with a “pre-existing” interest in the arts, GE is not intended to allow her to explore those interests? Conversely, if a pre-med and biology major wants to complement his training with an understanding of religious study and holistic healing, GE is not applicable? This appears to be intended to discourage students from seeing GE in a holistic, self-guided process and major enhancing way.

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

How about ".. the GEGR program introduces students to the breadth of knowledge and provides skills that are broadly applicable, thus expanding upon the knowledge and skills gained in the disciplinary major." I think we can delete "or catering to students' preexisting interests", which is rather condescending.


Again, a description of the program and the skills expected from the program. Please think of alternative language if it isn't clear.


Why say that then? Is this helpful information?


This language is taken from AACU and it standard language for the concept of General Education and has been for decades. The reference to liberal arts is in the EO1100 as well as: https://www.aacu.org/leap/essential-learning-outcomes


Totally agree with Peter here.


The phrase (second line, page 2), "In the liberal arts tradition ... " is really not necessary and and suggests a perspective on GE that is not universally agreed upon across colleges. Maybe start the sentence with, "The GEGR Program .... "


Excellent observation- would be useful to include in outcomes document as well as elsewhere in this document. Please provide suggestions.


Beth Eldon in meeting: Can we tie back into these three later? When we define the outcomes?


Over-stating. Perhaps "to equip students to lead..."?

collaboration across academic units to create Concentrations and to offer courses at accessible times;

establishment of program enforcement mechanisms that help rather than hinder student progress through the program; and

communication with feeder community colleges regarding the CSULB GEGR Program.

2.0 STRUCTURE OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMThe GE Program is organized as three sequential stages.

The first is the Foundation: four courses designed to provide fundamental learning skills. The second is Explorations: nine courses (except when a tenth course in laboratory activity is

allowed as described in Section 3.2.2.1 below) distributed across the curriculum that are intended to provide an opportunity to explore the various way of acquiring and examining knowledge while continuing to develop learning skills.

The third is Upper-Division GE Courses: three courses designed to integrate knowledge and skills developed earlier in the curriculum.

In completing the Foundation, Explorations, and Upper-Division stages of the GE Program, all students must complete the distribution pattern described in Section 3.0 below. At the upper division, students must take one three-unit course each in Areas B, C, and D. These courses should be taken at California State University, Long Beach; they may also be taken at another California State University campus. In order to bring coherence to the Upper-Division GE Courses and the entire GE Program, students may pursue a Concentration of courses (see below Section 5.0).

2.1 Academic Preparation All students are assessed at entry into the University for readiness for baccalaureate-level work in English composition and mathematics. Students who have demonstrated a need for additional support in English composition or mathematics will be placed in GE courses that provide such academic support, for instance through co-requisites or stretch components, as mandated in CSU Executive Order 1110 on Assessment of Academic Preparation (EO 1110).

2.2 Foundation The first-year program at CSULB pays special attention to the development and improvement of fundamental academic skills that are critical to student success in college. Every CSULB student will be expected to demonstrate mastery of key academic skills early in the course of study within the first year. Among the skills most central to success are oral and written communication in English, mathematical concepts and quantitative reasoning, and analytical and critical thinking. Students also need a solid foundation in skills for learning, including information literacy and basic technology skills.

The following courses make up the Foundation curriculum, also known as Golden Four or Basic Skills:

One three-unit course in Oral Communication in English (Subarea A1) One three-unit course in Written Communication in English (Subarea A2) One three-unit course in Critical Thinking (Subarea A3) One three-unit course in Mathematics/Quantitative Reasoning (Subarea B4)

2.2.1 Notes Detailed descriptions of these Areas are found in Section 3.0 below. The Foundation curriculum must be completed by the time the student has completed thirty

units of baccalaureate-level work at CSULB. Each course must be completed with a grade of C- or better.

979899

100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144


Clarify with Jody


Changed from 36, may be due to no longer using prep classes. Does this mean if they DFW one of the golden four in their second semester (if taking the 15/semester recommended) that they are not able to progress? This could hurt 4 year grad rates. Not clear what the consequence is?


There's no 2.2.2 so can we get rid of the numbering here?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

I agree with Birgit, the "Golden Four" terminology is clumsy, especially since it is used parenthetically, and every usage is followed by a list. Is it to emphasize that the Foundation includes A1, A2, A3, and B4? Couldn't we say "The following courses make up the Foundation curriculum of basic skills:"


It is the language used by the CSU. perhaps they are trying to make it a "thing" like creating your own nickname and hoping it sticks? LOL Jody may know more.


Known by whom? Maybe add where this reference comes from or just discard this comment if it doesn't add value?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

suggest " ... early in the course of study, preferably within the first year." (Many CNSM students require 3 semesters to complete the four foundation courses due to heavy major requirements.)

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

How about "...; however courses taken at another CSU campus may be transferrable."


Per the EO, all UD B C and D can be taken at any CSU. The use of should is to encourage students to take them at CSULB however they may be taken at any CSU. Would love better wording for this.


I agree.

David Shafer, 09/18/18,

From my perspective, the independent clause after the semicolon appears to nullify the import of the first part of the sentence.


see my comment below.


Only the upper level courses? Why are we differentiating? Isn't that implied by someone transferring from community college that they do their upper level here? What other reasons come into play here?

Courses in the Foundation curriculum will be numbered from 100 to 199. Any course that fulfills GE requirements in A2 or B4 Foundation must meet the requirements of

EO 1110. Satisfaction of CSU GE Subarea B4 Mathematics/Quantitative Reasoning in the lower division

shall fulfill CSU graduation requirements for mathematics/quantitative reasoning, exclusive of mathematics/quantitative reasoning courses necessary for satisfaction of major requirements.

2.3 Explorations After an early focus on fundamental learning and academic skills, students will have an opportunity to explore human knowledge in many disciplines. The Explorations stage encompasses all areas at the lower division outside the Foundation curriculum, as described in the Distribution sections in Section 3.0. It does not include the final nine units of upper-division GE that are distributed in Areas B, C, and D and described below.

GE Courses that are not in the Foundation but are numbered from 100 through 199 may be appropriately taken at the same time as courses in the Foundation curriculum; however, the GEGC will establish expectations for such courses that will acknowledge the nature of the student audience. Courses that demonstrably integrate skills and content or content-focused courses that are linked to skills courses are especially suitable for this level.

Although the primary purpose of Explorations is the development of breadth of knowledge, it is expected that all courses will offer opportunities for continued development of foundational skills. Reading, writing, oral discussion and presentation, problem solving, quantitative reasoning, and critically and analytically based research are central to the learning of content. For this reason, all courses in Explorations must have at least one pre- or co-requisite from the Foundation (which may or may not be specified), and all Upper-Division GE Courses must have the entire Foundation curriculum as prerequisite.

In addition, as students progress through their Explorations, they will be expected to develop additional skills and attributes, including ethical reasoning, analytical reading, creativity, respect for difference, awareness of other cultures, questioning of stereotypes, the values of citizenship, negotiating skills, and other attributes of use in a diverse society. Courses at this level will be evaluated for their attention to one or more of these areas and to Foundation skills, as well as content.

2.4 Upper-Division GE Courses The final stage of the GE Program encompasses nine upper-division GE units. All students, including transfer students who have completed a certified lower-division GE Program, must complete nine units of Upper-Division GE Courses in Areas B, C, and D (one three-unit class in each Area).

In most cases, upper-division GE Courses should be restricted to students who have completed 60 semester units or more. This protects the integrity of the increasing complexity of degree requirements, and it conserves upper-division courses for the graduating seniors whose degree completion could be slowed without access to required upper-division GE Courses. At the same time, the CSU is committed to providing the courses students need, when they need them. There may be cases in which students with fewer than 60 units may need to enroll in an Upper-Division GE Course to continue making full-time progress toward degree completion. At a minimum, students shall have attained sophomore standing, completed the entire Foundation (aka the Golden Four: oral communication, written communication, critical thinking and mathematics/quantitative reasoning), and completed at least one GE Course from the Explorations stage before enrolling in Upper-Division GE Courses.

145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

So leave out that statement. How about "In most cases, upper-division GE Courses should be restricted to students who have completed 60 semester units or more. This protects the integrity of the increasing complexity of upper division courses, and conserves them for the graduating seniors, whose degree completion could be slowed without access to required upper-division GE Courses. However, there may be cases in which students with fewer than 60 units need to enroll in an Upper-Division GE Course to continue making full-time progress toward degree completion. In these cases, students shall have attained sophomore standing, have completed the entire Foundation (oral communication, written communication, critical thinking and mathematics/quantitative reasoning), and have completed at least one relevant GE Course from the Explorations stage before enrolling in Upper-Division GE Courses." (It seems quite reasonable for an Upper Division GE B (or C or D) course to require prior completion of a B (or C or D, respectively) Explorations course.)


This is the caveat that refers to students taking upper division courses before reaching 60 units. I agree- it is badly worded and confusing and doesn't have anything to do with course enrollment and offerings.


That's a big statement. In our department, required coure degree requirement classes that don't make minimum enrollment are canceled. Does this signal a shift in CSU policy?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

GEGC needs to evaluate whether courses fulfill GE essential skills, including foundation skills. (Disciplinary content is the realm of the instructor, the department, and the college.) The criteria for fulfilling GE essential skills must be explicity to faculty and must not pit the LEAP learning outcomes against the GE policy. Other issues of content arise in the GR, where GEGC needs to look at writing instruction, human diversity, or global issues. Again, criteria must be explicit and transparent to faculty.


I agree- here is the original 2012 text: For this reason, all courses outside the Foundation must have pre- or co-requisites from the Foundation, and all courses numbered 300 or higher must have the entire Foundation curriculum as prerequisites.


This seems contradictory or is at least confusing to me. If it may or may not be specified, how do we know whether it exists, and why do we expect that then at all?


Original text from 2012 GE policy: however, the General Education Governing Committee will establish expectations for such courses that will acknowledge the nature of the student audience with at least some focus on essential learning skills. Courses that demonstrably integrate skills and content or content-focused courses that are linked to skills courses are especially suitable for this level.


What does that mean?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

"Satisfaction of CSU GE Subarea B4 Mathematics/Quantitative Reasoning in the lower divisionshall fulfill CSU graduation requirements for mathematics/quantitative reasoning. Note, however, that specific majors may require additional mathematics/quantitative reasoning courses."


Please think of clarifying language.


agreed


How does that tie in with the upper division B requirement? I find this sentence a bit confusing.

3.0 SUBJECT AREA DISTRIBUTION, COURSE CONTENT, AND INSTRUCTION CRITERIA IN GENERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM

Students must complete forty-eight units of approved GE Courses, distributed as detailed below. After a Section on general criteria (3.1), each part of this Section of the policy details distribution as well as course content and instruction criteria specific to each Area and Subarea. Courses certified as GE Courses must meet two sets of criteria: the general criteria for what constitutes a GE Course, and the specific criteria for the Area or Subarea in which they are being certified.

3.1 General Criteria All courses in the GE Program must demonstrably encourage development of academic skills. GE Courses should include, as an integral component of teaching, sensitivity to different points of view and diverse learning methods.

Instructors must be conscious when requesting GE certification for a certain Area or Subarea that their class may be the only exposure a student gets to that Area or Subarea. Therefore, the class as a whole—and not the general topic or discipline—must be appropriate to that Area or Subarea. Rather than GE being an afterthought to make a class fit into that Area or Subarea, with just perfunctory treatment or minimal coverage of the Area or Subarea, a class must be created around the concept of covering GE explicitly, directly, thoroughly, and significantly, integrating the Area or Subarea throughout the class. The course may simultaneously cover discipline-specific material; however, that material must be integrated with the GE content.

At the Foundation stage, academic skills will focus on oral and written communication, critical thinking, or mathematics and quantitative reasoning. Because of the nature of the courses that constitute the Foundation stage, it is expected that they will be organized either as small groups or as large lectures with small group discussions, activities, or workshops. Although no explicit class size limit will be set for other GE Courses targeted to first-year students, the GEGC will consider whether the proposed modes of instruction are consistent with the learning objectives of the course and the level.

Courses beyond the Foundation stage must continue to enhance the Foundation skills, as well as build additional skills as indicated in the descriptions of the specific levels. Wherever appropriate, instruction approved to fulfill the GE requirements should recognize the contributions to knowledge and civilization that have been made by members of various cultural groups and genders. Wherever appropriate, the content of courses should include examples of the relationship of human and cultural diversity to the subject matter.

In order to be approved for a specific GE Area or Subarea, the Standard Course Outline (SCO) must include

one third of the Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) clearly dedicated to the requested Area or Subarea and taken or adapted from the implementation document defining GE SLOs approved by the Academic Senate and maintained by the GEGC;

enough scheduled class topics to directly address the SLO(s) dedicated to the requested Area or Subarea;

textbooks/readings and bibliography items that clearly address the Area or Subarea being requested; and

assignment(s) that clearly assess students’ learning of the Area or Subarea and that count for at least one third of the student’s final grade for the class. The class can either have one single assignment making up, or a collection of assignments adding up to, at least one third of the final grade.

o A short description must be provided that explains how the assignment(s) addressing the GE Area or Subarea criteria fulfill the SLO(s) in the GE Area or Subarea being requested.

192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239


What is this comment referencing?

Ruth Piker, 09/23/18,

should we specify that it is lower division?


1/3 of grade is not clear. Is this skills or content materials again not clear how this would be evaluated. If the skill is writing? How would this work? Right now 2 sub skills are required for each skill so what if need different assignments for different skills and then also for content?


LOL Again it goes exactly back to the issue of what is considered "enough". If someone covers global topics for two weeks of the semester, is that enough to be certified as a global issue? Definitely a discussion we will need to have in our meetings!


yes!


Maybe specify what "enough" means.


Please think of additional ways to measure the coverage of GE content matter vs. the discipline outcomes. Currently, there is a debate in GEGC regarding how much is "enough" and how much is too little. Hard to think of a good formula- but it is worth discussing and thinking of alternatives?


The idea of "one third" is potentially problematic. Is it just a straight count of the SCOs divided by three? In a given course, not every SCO is goinig to have the same weight in terms of time it takes to cover and depth of focus, so this seems like a poor criteria.


Not clear how this would work since you need SLO’s based on skills and content.


It is purposely vague to leave the decision to address human and cultural diversity up to the instructor. If it is appropriate then it is up to the instructor to decide how where to include.


Vague. Will this be defind later?

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

... appropriate to that Area or Subarea as defined by ??? LEAP learning outcomes? descriptions in Section 3 of this document (below)? This would also help below in the discussion of 1/3 and how much is enough.


3.1 up until general criteria is language from the original 2012 GE Policy. Criteria with 1/3 is new


Yes Ma'am!


Key: Could we clarify what of the subsequent sections is exactly EO 1100 and where we are adding new content or interpretation? This would be really helpful for reviewing.

3.2 Lower-Division Courses

3.2.1 Area A, English Language Communication and Critical Thinking

3.2.1.1 DistributionStudents must complete nine units in Area A, English Language Communication and Critical Thinking (all courses at the lower division), as follows:

Area A1: Three units chosen from approved courses in Oral Communication. Area A2: Three units chosen from approved courses in Written Communication. Area A3: Three units chosen from approved courses in Critical Thinking.

3.2.1.2 Criteria

3.2.1.2.1 Criteria for Subareas A1, Oral Communication, and A2, Written CommunicationCourses in fulfillment of Subareas A1 and A2 will develop students’ knowledge and understanding of the form, content, context, and effectiveness of communication. Students will examine communication from the rhetorical perspective by practicing accuracy, reasoning, organization, and persuasion. Students will enhance their information literacy skills by developing their abilities to find, critically evaluate, organize, and report information, and by reading, writing, and listening effectively. Instruction will provide an understanding of the psychological basis and social significance of communication, including how communication operates in various situations.

3.2.1.2.1.1 Criteria for Subarea A1, Oral CommunicationCourses in fulfillment of Subarea A1 will develop students’ proficiency in oral communication in English. Coursework must include active participation and practice in oral communication in English.

3.2.1.2.1.2 Criteria for Subarea A2, Written CommunicationCourses in fulfillment of Subarea A2 will develop students’ proficiency in written communication in English. Coursework must include active participation and practice in written communication in English.

3.2.1.2.2 Criteria for Subarea A3, Critical ThinkingCourses in fulfillment of Subarea A3 will develop students’ knowledge and understanding of logic and its relation to language; of elementary inductive and deductive processes, including an understanding of the formal and informal fallacies of language and thought; and of the ability to distinguish matters of fact from issues of judgment or opinion. Courses in fulfillment of Subarea A3 will develop students’ abilities to analyze, criticize, and advocate ideas; to reason inductively and deductively; and to reach well-supported factual or judgmental conclusions.

3.2.2 Area B, Scientific Inquiry and Quantitative Reasoning 3.2.2.1 Distribution

Students must complete nine units at the lower division and three units at the upper division in Area B, Scientific Inquiry and Quantitative Reasoning. One additional unit may be taken in Area

240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287


This is where our student learning outcomes will be important.

Cheryl Rock, 09/21/18,

I feel that the word " Logic" is interpreted differently in other fields and from philosophers standpoint may be different. In science course we usually refer to it as an argument which have several hypothesis or premises....

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

If information literacy is such an essential component in written and oral communcation, then shouldn't it be one of the primary skills that is prechecked on the GEAR form when either the A1 or the A1 GE categories is selected?

B3 for a laboratory course of not more than one semester unit value, taken in conjunction with a Physical Science (B1) or Life Science (B2) course. The distribution within Area B is as follows:

Area B1: Three units chosen from approved courses in Physical Science. Area B2: Three units chosen from approved courses in Life Science. Area B3: One additional unit may be taken in Area B3 for a laboratory course of not more than

one semester unit value, taken in conjunction with a Physical Science (B1) or Life Science (B2) course. This additional unit brings the total GE Program from 48 units to 49 units.

Area B4: Three units chosen from approved courses in Mathematics/Quantitative Reasoning. Area B-UD: Three units chosen from any upper-division course in Area B.

3.2.2.2 Criteria

3.2.2.2.1 Criteria for Subareas B1, Physical Science, B2, Life Science, and B3, Laboratory CourseIn Subareas B1, B2, and B3, students will develop knowledge of scientific theories, concepts, and data about both living and non-living systems. Students will achieve an understanding and appreciation of scientific principles and the scientific method, as well as the potential limits of scientific endeavors and the value systems and ethics associated with human inquiry. Wherever appropriate, courses may address the influence that the acquisition of scientific knowledge has had on the development of the world's civilizations.

3.2.2.2.1.1 Criteria for Subarea B1, Physical ScienceCourses in fulfillment of Subarea B1 will develop students’ knowledge of the facts and principles which form the foundations of non-living systems. Courses may focus on a specific physical science or survey physical sciences in general.

3.2.2.2.1.2 Criteria for Subarea B2, Life ScienceCourses in fulfillment of Subarea B2 will develop students’ knowledge of the facts and principles which form the foundations of all living systems and organisms.

3.2.2.2.1.3 Criteria for Subarea B3, Laboratory CourseA laboratory course of not more than one semester unit value, associated with Subarea B1 or Subarea B2, is required if neither the B1 nor B2 course includes a laboratory component.

3.2.2.2.2 Criteria for Subarea B4, Mathematics/Quantitative ReasoningCourses in fulfillment of Subarea B4 will develop students’ mathematic/quantitative reasoning skills. Courses will provide students a college-level academic experience that emphasizes how to use quantitative skills in problem-solving and modeling, provides a foundation in numerical literacy, and helps meet quantitative needs inside and outside of academia. When addressing questions about the real world, students will create, use, and interpret mathematical models. Conclusions and/or results will be formulated, validated, and analyzed using mental techniques, paper and pencil, algebra, and technology as appropriate.

Courses in Subarea B4 shall include a prerequisite reflective only of skills and knowledge required in the course. In addition to traditional mathematics, courses in Subarea B4 may include, but are not limited to, computer science, personal finance, statistics or discipline-based mathematics or quantitative reasoning courses that

288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335


According to the EO: quantitative skills in problem-solving and modeling, provides a foundation in numerical literacy, and helps meet quantitative needs inside and outside of academia.


Would a course in personal finance really have enough meat to it to ensure our students get a real solid exposure to mathematics/quantitative reasoning? Again, maybe I'm off base, but it seems a little light to me.


It isn't just coding. If you are using programs such as R to calculate or analyze data you are using math skills. I have now reached the limit of my skills so somone with a computer science background will probably provide more context. :-)


I'm not a programmer, so forgive me if the question if off-base, but is coding really mathematical reasoning?


The phrase "provide students a college-level experience that" makes this sentence stylistically awkward even though it's grammatically correct. It creates a question in the reader about whether the phrase "provides a foundation in numerical literacy" refers back to the word "will" or to the later word "that" Obviously because it says "provides" instead of "provide" it refers to "that" instead of "will" but because we have the verb "provide" twice, it gets confusing. It would be a lot easier to read if it just said: "Courses will emphasize how to use quantitative skills in problem solving and modeling, provide a foundation in numerical literacy, and help meet quantitative needs inside and outside of academia."


How does this relate to the GE description? I don' think it matters here? we don't want to have a number requirement for seats? or is that important to include?


does the lab course have a min or max number of seats? Some lab classes are small such as 18 students .

demonstrably address the criteria above.

3.2.3 Area C, Arts and Humanities

3.2.3.1 DistributionStudents must complete nine units at the lower division and three units at the upper division in Area C, Arts and Humanities. The distribution within Area C is as follows:

Area C1: Three units chosen from approved courses in the Arts (Arts, Cinema, Dance, Music, Theater)

Area C2: Three units chosen from approved courses in the Humanities (Literature, Philosophy, Language other than English

Three additional units chosen from approved courses either in Area C1 or in Area C2. Area C-UD: Three units chosen from any upper-division course in Area C.

3.2.3.2 Criteria

3.2.3.2.1 Criteria for Subareas C1, Arts (Arts, Cinema, Dance, Music, Theatre) and C2, Humanities (Literature, Philosophy, Languages other than English)Across the disciplines in Area C, students will cultivate intellect, imagination, sensibility and sensitivity. Activities may include participation in creative experiences; Area C, however, excludes courses that exclusively emphasize skills development.

3.2.3.2.1.1 Criteria for Subarea C1, Arts (Arts, Cinema, Dance, Music, Theatre)Courses in fulfillment of Subarea C1 will develop students’ subjective as well as objective response to aesthetic experiences, as well as their understanding of the integrity of both emotional and intellectual responses. Students will cultivate and refine their affective, cognitive, and physical faculties through aesthetic, creative experiences and the corresponding study of works of human imagination. In their intellectual and subjective considerations, students will develop a better understanding of the interrelationship between the self and the creative arts and the role of the arts in human culture. Subarea C1 includes courses in art disciplines, for instance visual art, dance, theater, creative writing, music, cinematography, and design. Wherever appropriate, courses may address diverse artistic traditions.

3.2.3.2.1.2 Criteria for Subarea C2, Humanities (Literature, Philosophy, Languages other than English)Courses in fulfillment of Subarea C2 will develop students’ understanding of the integrity of intellectual responses, as well as cultivate and refine their cognitive and affective faculties through the study of human culture. In their intellectual and subjective considerations, students will develop a better understanding of the interrelationship between the self and the humanities. Courses in languages other than English may be included in this requirement because of their implications for cultures both in their linguistic structures and in their use in literature, but courses which are approved to fulfill this requirement must contain a cultural component and may not be solely skill acquisition courses. Wherever appropriate, courses may address the humanities in a variety of cultures.

3.2.4 Area D, Social Sciences

336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383


"should"?


You should really take a look at the SLOs in order to define specific outcomes for the C category that align with the disciplines. I hadn't planned on introducing the document until after we looked at the policy but seems that we should look at both.

Colleen Dunagan, 09/21/18,

I will take a closer look at the EO and communicate this info to COTA.


This language is verbatim from the EO. I suggest this distinction be incorporated in the proposed sister document - SLOs for GE subject areas as this is an important distinction and important for GEGC to keep in mind when evaluating courses in C.


KEY: I think that the lists indicate Departments and that the real difference lies in methodologies, as both Arts and Humanities deal with culture - pedagogically and disciplinarily speaking, a key difference between the Arts and the Humanities lies in the distinction between analyzing culture and works of imagination versus creating those works. However, departments in COTA are not engaged only in creative production. For example, humanities methodologies are utilized by historians and theorists working in arts disciplines; and the English Department teaches creative writing.


Great point. Unfortunately this is the exact wording from the chancellors office and is also present in our 2012 GE.


MAIN/KEY: This should be more clearly defined. "Skill development" is a very broad term. In differnet subareas within the Arts and Humanities, the term has vastly different meanings.


I'm confused by the comment, Colleen, because it seems there is a list - did I misunderstand?


KEY: Section 3.2.3.2.1 Addressing the lists of subjects for both ARTS and HUMANITIES. Colleagues in COTA are concerned about the listing of subject areas. One concern is that the list does not exactly match the labels used by Departments in COTA currently and the feeling is that if there is a list it should match the labels used currently by COTA Departments (Art, Dance, Design, Film, Music, Theatre).The other ideas floating about is that the lists should be removed entirely- for both Arts and Humanities.


Missing closing parenthases here.

3.2.4.1 DistributionStudents must complete nine units at the lower division and three units at the upper division in Area D, Social Sciences. The distribution within Area D is as follows:

Area D1: Three units chosen from approved courses in US History. Area D2: Three units chosen from approved courses in Constitution and American Ideals. Area D3: Three units chosen from approved courses in Social Sciences and Citizenship. Area D-UD: Three units chosen from any upper-division course in Area D.

3.2.4.2 Criteria3.2.4.2.1 Criteria for Subareas D1, US History, D2, Constitution and American Ideals, and D3,

Social and Behavioral Sciences and HistoryAcross the disciplines in Area D, students will learn how human social, political and economic institutions and behavior are inextricably interwoven. Through fulfillment of the Area D requirement, students will develop an understanding of problems and issues from the respective disciplinary perspectives and will examine issues in their contemporary as well as historical settings and in a variety of cultural contexts. Students will explore the principles, methodologies, value systems, and ethics employed in social scientific inquiry. Area D excludes courses that emphasize skills development and professional preparation.

3.2.4.2.1.1 Criteria for Subarea D1, US HistoryCourses in fulfillment of Area D1 will foster in students an awareness of the experience and of the people, institutions, circumstances, and events in the history of the US that have shaped contemporary conditions in the US, as provided for in Title 5, Article 40404 of the California Code of Regulations. This requirement is intended to enable students to function as responsible and constructive citizens. Courses in fulfillment of Subarea D1 will, at a minimum, include the following:

an analysis of the significant events occurring within the entire territory of the US, including the relationships among regions within that area and relationships with external regions and powers, as appropriate;

a chronological span of not less than one hundred (100) years; an examination of the nature and extent of the continuity of the US experience within

itself and with the cultures from which it is derived; consideration of the relationship of such factors as geography, religion, natural

resources, economics, cultural diversity, and politics to the development of the nation during the time period covered;

coverage of the role of national, economic, ethnic, gender, and socioeconomic groups in the events described;

introduction to the groups and individual leaders who have been instrumental in the development of the US;

attention to the phenomenon of conflict (or change) as a variable in the US national experience.

3.2.4.2.1.2 Criteria for Subarea D2, Constitution and American IdealsCourses in fulfillment of Area D2 will give students a comprehensive understanding of and appreciation for American political institutions and processes established by the US Constitution and the California state constitutions, as provided for in Title 5, Article

384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431


I sent you and Terri an email with more details! please read it before the meeting so you can ask any questions if the reply is unclear


Terri Wright, chair of Political Science, wrote the following to me:"I am curious to know how the criteria for D2 (American Constitution and Ideals) were determined, and what portions (if any) represent mandated language. If there are portions that are not mandated, the POSC faculty would like to weigh in on the language that will appear in the policy."The department's next meeting is on 17 October and, depending upon the answer to the question of whether it is "mandated language" it hopes to discuss this and would like to be heard on the criteria for D2.


comprehensive consideration of the relationship [....]


This is the lastest version of the EO but our language looks like it came from 405. EO 1061 https://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-1060.html


Language adopted from this EO: http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-405.pdf


I would like to suggest a change:"An examination of the nature and extent of continuity, evolution, and change [....]


EO language. CSU language.


Unnecessary to exclude “professional preparation” from this category. Why? What is a professional skills – thinking, reading, writing? Consider deleting.

40404 of the California Code of Regulations. Students will acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to effective political participation and citizenship. Courses in fulfillment of Subarea D2 will, at a minimum, include the following course content:

the political philosophy of the framers of the Constitution and the nature and operation of US political institutions and processes that operate under the Constitution as amended and interpreted;

the rights and obligations of citizens in the political system established under that Constitution;

the principles and practices of political organization, including political parties, interest groups, legislative politics, and campaign practices;

an introduction to constitutionally and legislatively established administrative and regulatory institutions;

an analysis of bureaucracies and their impact on citizens at the national, state, and local levels;

an analysis of the US citizenry, including political culture and voting behavior; the constitution of the state of California within a framework of the historical evolution

of the state and the nature of the processes of state and local government under that constitution;

the nature of federalism, including the relationship of federal to state and local practices, the resolution of jurisdictional conflicts, and the political processes involved.

3.2.4.2.1.3 Criteria for Subarea D3, Social and Behavioral Sciences and HistoryCourses in fulfillment of Area D3 will foster in students an awareness that human social, political, and economic institutions and behavior are inextricably interwoven. Problems and issues in these areas may be examined in their contemporary as well as historical settings.

3.2.5 Area E, Lifelong Learning and Self-Development

3.2.5.1 DistributionStudents must complete three units in Area E, Lifelong Learning and Self-Development (all courses at the lower division).

3.2.5.2 Criteria

3.2.5.2.1 Criteria for Area E, Lifelong Learning and Self-DevelopmentCourses in fulfillment of Area E will equip students for lifelong understanding and development of themselves as integrated physiological, social, and psychological beings. Physical activity may be included, if it is an integral part of the study elements described herein. Courses developed to meet this requirement may include topics such as, but not limited to, student success strategies, human behavior, sexuality, nutrition, physical and mental health, stress management, information literacy, social relationships and relationships with the physical environment, as well as implications of death and dying or avenues for lifelong learning. Courses in Area E will focus on the development of skills, abilities, and dispositions.

3.3 Upper-Division General Education Courses

432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457458459460461462463464465466467468469470471472473474475476477478479


Of course it is.... verbatim


Right. This wording is confusing. Is it from the EO?


All courses are supposed to work on the GE skills.


In the EO in E


Was "information literacy" part of the original EO? Shouldn’t this be part of critical thinking in A? Consider removing.


Again exact language from the EO/CSU and i think the exact same as current 2012 GE policy


If we're going to mention this we should include gender as well.


The specific requirements in the first two are reflective of California Code requirements.


Key: This one seems to have way less criteria. No bullet point list here? Why is this one specified less than the others? Shouldn't they all be at the same level?


I'd prefer the word "for" here instead of "to." The word "to" sets the reader up to anticipate a verb rather than a noun form.

All Upper-Division GE Courses must require students to demonstrate advanced college skills such as, but not limited to, synthesis and application of knowledge, analysis, critique, and research. Upper-Division GE Courses are intended to help students integrate knowledge and skills developed earlier in the GE Program, working at a more advanced level than Foundation and Explorations courses. Therefore, Upper-Division GE Courses must require as pre-requisites sophomore standing, completion of the entire Foundation (aka the Golden Four: oral communication, written communication, critical thinking and mathematics/quantitative reasoning), and at least one GE Course from the Explorations stage.

3.3.1 Courses requesting certification at the upper-division must meet the general criteria for GE Courses articulated in Section 3.1, the content criteria of at least one of the Subareas, and the general upper-division criteria for GE Courses articulated in this Section (3.3). However, these courses will only be categorized as B-UD, C-UD, and D-UD.

3.3.2 Because GE is a breadth requirement, students will normally have no prior experience in the discipline beyond an introductory course. Any upper-division course that has prerequisites that are not on the General Education Master Course List (i.e., discipline-specific prerequisites) will be approved only if there are other options in the Area or Subarea to ensure that such requisites will not unduly restrict enrollment in the Area or Subarea. Each degree program may only have one class that both has prerequisites outside of GE (major-specific prerequisite) and fulfills a GE Area.

3.3.3 All courses approved for Area C at the upper division will require at least 2,500 words of writing. No upper-division Area C course shall have more than seventy enrolled students.

3.3.4 All nine units of upper-division GE classes (one each in Areas B, C, and D) should be taken at California State University, Long Beach; they may also be taken at another California State University campus.

4.0 CAMPUS-SPECIFIC GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS

CSULB identifies three Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements (GR) that students must complete. These Categories are (1) one writing-intensive course, (2) one course in the area of racial and ethnic diversity in the US, and (3) one course in the area of global knowledge and engagement. Students must complete nine units of Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements, which are governed by the following general (4.1) and specific (4.2-4.4) criteria.

4.1 General Criteria Courses in fulfillment of Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements must demonstrably encourage development of academic skills. Courses certified for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements should include, as an integral component of teaching, sensitivity to different points of view and diverse learning methods.

Instructors must be conscious when requesting certification for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements in a certain category that their class may be the only exposure a student gets to that category. Therefore, the class as a whole—and not the general topic or discipline—must be appropriate to that category. Rather than Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements being an afterthought to make a class fit into that category, with just perfunctory treatment or minimal coverage of the category, a class must be created around the concept of covering Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements explicitly, directly, thoroughly, and significantly, integrating the category throughout the class. The

480481482483484485486487488489490491492493494495496497498499500501502503504505506507508509510511512513514515516517518519520521522523524525526527

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

Yes, I'd preface the first sentence with a statement such as "In support of CSULB's shared values of intellectual rigor, inclusive excellence, and the public good, CSULB identifies three Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements (GR) that students must complete, as part of their GE or major requirements. These categories are..."


There is the RE reasoning explained in the description later on, but it should be introduced here, and I am curious why WI is now being kept after the long conversations around how to proceed with it, and I assume others will be curious about that as well.


Key: I'd really like to see the rationale for each of these being made explicit.

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

See discussion of wording above in section 2.0. 3.3.4 should match.


Good question. I assume it is because the Humanities are housed there and the goal is make sure that the Arts courses are not solely practice-based coures.


What is the rationale for having that for category C but not for D?


We are actually losing 2500 words in this version of the policy (previously capstones accounted for two courses with 2500 word req plus the WI courses.


So not required for B or D? I can see not requiring it for B (science course) but why not for D? Further, why then did this discussion document include an additional campus writing requirement plus this? Why not satisfy more exposure to writing by adding this to C and D and removing the WI campus requirement.? Just a thought.


New Comment (9/24/18): Under graduation requirements: Faculty have stated that they think control over the approval of these additional and non-campus requirements IF they remain, should be at the college level. Creating another committee like GEGC to do this work is too overly cumbersome. These can and should be embedded into the major (otherwise they will add time to degree) and in that case college curricular committees are more than capable to assessing and verifying this.


YES! I agree.


MAIN/KEY ISSUE. REMOVE. Completely unnecessary and not stated anywhere in the EO. The EO states that there are no limits on double counting major courses, further in FAQs and follow-up from the CO, it was clarified that courses with major only pre-requisites CAN be certified if there are other options for students to complete. That is stated in the first part of 3.3.2 in this document. This additional language of limiting major classes in GE is in contradiction to the EO.


YES agreed!!!


This is too vague and left to interpretation. How many is enough other courses? This needs specific formulas or guidance – otherwise it is not enforceable and will unduly restrict courses that could be certified.

course may simultaneously cover discipline-specific material; however, that material must be integrated with the Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements content.

In order to be approved for a specific Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements category, a Standard Course Outline (SCO) must include:

one third of the Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) clearly dedicated to the requested category and taken or adapted from the implementation document defining GR SLOs approved by the Academic Senate and maintained by the GRGC;

enough scheduled class topics to directly address the SLO(s) dedicated to the requested category;

textbooks/readings and bibliography items that clearly address the category being requested; and

assignment(s) that clearly assess students’ learning of the category and that count for at least one third of the student’s final grade for the class. The class can either have one single assignment making up, or a collection of assignments adding up to, at least one third of the final grade.

o A short description must be provided that explains how the assignment(s) addressing the criteria in the GR Category fulfill the SLO(s) in the category being requested.

4.2 Skills-Based Campus-Specific Graduation Requirement

4.2.1 Writing-Intensive Course (Category WI)In recognition of the fact that a graduate of a university must have skills in written communication beyond the first-year level as required in GE Area A2, CSULB requires that all students must complete at least one upper-division class with three units designated as GR Category Writing-Intensive.

Programs may develop and require their own Writing-Intensive Course, or they can leave the choice of course up to students. No Writing-Intensive Course shall have more than thirty-five enrolled students. All Writing-Intensive Courses shall require completion of the entire GE Foundation as a prerequisite.

4.2.1.1 Courses in fulfillment of the Writing-Intensive GR Category must meet the following criteria:

4.2.1.1.1 Instructors in all Writing-Intensive Courses will integrate into the course a substantial writing component that meets Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) for writing as established by the GEGC. This is usually interpreted to mean at least a total of 5,000 words in the various assignments. The writing component shall be integrated throughout the courses and incorporate elements such as, but not limited to, regular opportunities for drafts, revision, ongoing evaluation, and feedback throughout the semester. The writing component may culminate in a cumulative report or project, as long as that report or project incorporates the aforementioned elements. The writing assignments may be in whatever form the instructor deems appropriate to the subject matter and methodology of the course, but the assignments must be a substantial factor in evaluating student performance. This is interpreted to mean at least a total of two-thirds of the final grade is based on the student’s writing.

4.2.1.1.2 All Writing-Intensive Courses must include instructional activities that reflect best practices in writing instruction such as, but not limited to, the introduction and practice of prewriting, exploratory writing, outlining, drafting, revision in response to instructor feedback on drafts and revisions, editing strategies, peer review, summarizing, relevant

528529530531532533534535536537538539540541542543544545546547548549550551552553554555556557558559560561562563564565566567568569570571572573574575


agreed.


This is vague and could cause confusion if adopted.


New Comment 9/24/2018: From a faculty member in the Dept - CDFS 319 cannot accommodate guidance requiring “best practice in writing instruction.” These are identified to include: the introduction, prewriting, exploratory writing, outlining, drafting, and editing strategies. Instruction expected on research methods and information literacy is vague. Either the WI, as a General Education course, is intended to require students to write, or it is intended to be a “writing instruction” course. If it is just the former then departments across campus can bring their subject matters to bear on this GE category. If it is the latter, then the course is simply an English Writing course. Our CDFS 319 SLO’s cannot be stretched to meet the heavy burden of mandating this level of what should be “foundational writing skill development” in standard writing conventions, nor can our part-time instructors be expected to have the expertise to do so. As written, this new Writing Intensive policy is simply a “remedial writing course. Classroom instruction that should be devoted to subject matter is being sacrificed by the writing processes these proposed policies are now dictating.


Agreed.


MAIN/KEY ISSUE: WI should be removed from a campus requirement. The English Language Category of GE (writing portion) states its goal is to development competency in writing language. Further, 2,500 words was also added to category C and can be added to category D if needed, but this should not be a separate campus requirement. Adding this plus 6 additional units is excessive and will lead to delays in graduation for high unit majors.


Hence the name change of the document to reflect it is both GE and GR policies.


MAIN/KEY ISSUE: As above Specific Graduation Requirements should not be part of this policy and should be removed.


I completely agree with you.


Consider defining "enough."


Not every course in the discipline is eligible for GE certification. IF there is no way to integrate 1/3 of content toward GE content, perhaps it isn't a course for GE?


This is supposed to be an overlay—So this would mean 1/3 have to be based on the content area + 1/3 would have to be for the overlay and what about the skill based? Are they a part of this equation? This may be a problem for courses that are both meeting needs of accreditation that requires specific SLOs for each content area, the number of SLOs doesn’t equal the amount of class time. For many classes used for teaching credentialing specific SLOs that show for example that Chronic diseases are covered they require not just one SLO for chronic disease but one for heart disease, diabetes, etc.


I think the purpose of this statement was to eliminate the possiblity of a course just throwing in random content to meet the graduation requirement on top of discipline content. I think better wording would be to focus on the level of integration between GR and discipline specific content. want to take a stab at making it clearer?


Of course the class with cover discipline-specific material, otherwise it wouldn't be part of a department... This seems like an unncessary statement.

documentation conventions, research methods, and information literacy.

4.2.1.1.3 Instructors who teach Writing-Intensive Courses should refer students with serious writing difficulties to seek writing instruction, tutoring, or other appropriate assistance to improve their writing skills as early as possible. For this reason, there must be early feedback on student writing (usually by week three of the term) and further feedback throughout the term, including opportunity for revision where appropriate to the assignment.

4.2.1.1.4 Faculty should obtain guidance in the choice of writing assignments and information on evaluating writing from the Director of the Writing Across the Curriculum program and through workshops and other supportive programs sponsored by the Division of Academic Affairs and the Faculty Center for Professional Development.

4.3 Content-Based Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements The purpose of both the Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the US and the Global Knowledge and Engagement campus-specific graduation requirements is to provide students with the analytical skills needed to develop critical and reflective perspectives on difference within both domestic and global spheres, and to prepare them to function, thrive, and provide leadership in multicultural, multiethnic, transnational, and interconnected global societies.

4.3.1 Course in Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the US (Category RE)It is the goal of the University that courses at CSULB foster respect for racial and ethnic diversity in the US. RE courses introduce students to the life experiences of people with whom they are less familiar in order to promote the understanding of diversity and encourage tolerance and acceptance of others in our increasingly multicultural society. While CSULB recognizes the importance of other forms of diversity—gender, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability status, nationality, etc.—the requirement for RE courses discussed here focuses specifically on the experiences and concerns of four historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups within the US: Native Americans, African-Americans, Latino/a, and Asian-Americans. Therefore, courses must provide a critical examination and understanding of the nature and social implications of race and racialized ethnicity as both social constructions and lived realities, especially as these relate to the four historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in the US named above.

To recognize the significant influence of diverse populations and cultures within the US and to bring attention to these influences and the nature of these cultures, every student graduating with a baccalaureate degree from CSULB must satisfactorily complete one three-unit course of instruction that focuses on examples of racial and ethnic diversity in the US (RE courses) in the four main historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups within the US: Native Americans, African-Americans, Latino/a, or Asian-Americans.

4.3.1.1 Courses in fulfillment of the Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the US (RE) GR Category must meet the following criteria:

4.3.1.1.1 RE courses must present current and course-appropriate theoretical understandings of the nature of racial and ethnic diversity in the US. Courses fulfilling this graduation requirement will explore concepts such as, but not limited to, race, racism, racialization, ethnicity, racialized ethnicity, or ethnocentrism.

576577578579580581582583584585586587588589590591592593594595596597598599600601602603604605606607608609610611612613614615616617618619620621622623


American Caribbean missing?


But won't that be contingent on how diversity is ultimately defined (for purposes of GEGR)?


This is problematic and should be removed or edited.


I do not think that this statement adequately represent the ethnic groups in the USA. Speaking from the point of view as an American-Caribbean I feel strongly that this Racial/Ethnic Group is Underrepresented and should be inlcuded among these groups.


Why are Middle Eastern Americans and Pacific Islander Americans now excluded as well? They were in the previous campus requirement, as was the elements of gender. As above, this class if it is to remain a campus-wide requirement must embrace diversity in all forms and communicate to our student, community, and CA that CSULB Inclusive Excellence.


I find this change problematic for a number of reasons. I am particularly concerned about the removal of gender diversity--as if oppression of women is no longer much of a problem in contemporary society. Can we really honestly actually be considering making this change in the era of #MeToo? It seems symptomatic of the kind of thinking that let Stanford swimmer Brock Turner off with only three months in prison for raping a classmate and that dismisses the allegations against the current Supreme Court nominee as not particularly relevant. I say this as somebody who is included in the racial group that this requirement covers (Asian American), and who routinely faced racial slurs and insults growing up. I get the need for some focus on racial diversity, but I completely reject the notion that this should be at the expense of other important forms of diversity, particularly gender diversity.


It is also a tad bit patronizing


Agreed. It is offensive to be part of the "forgotten etc."


This is very marginalizing to these groups. This should be removed.

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

I agree that this requirement needs to be tied to the university's value of inclusive excellence. It is also clear that a single course cannot possible deal with all the components of diversity, and it is absurd to expect that one will. Our shared values (intellectual rigor, inclusive excellence, and the public good) must permeate both the curricular and the co-curricular activities on campus. I know, this begs the question of what criteria a course in the RE category should fulfill. I look forward to the conversation.


New Comment 9/24/18. From a faculty member in the Deparatment: Students walk into a classroom and see two fellow students already sitting in chairs in the classroom. Would you expect the majority of these students to notice first the students’ race or gender, or the fact they sit in wheel chairs? Suicide rates among LGBTQ youth are significantly troubling. Are youth committing and attempting to commit suicide because of their race or ethnicity, or because of their struggles with sexual identity, coming out and acceptance by their loved ones? University counseling centers across the country are inundated with students with diagnosed and undiagnosed mental health disorders, with anxiety disorders being among the most common. Do you think the vast majority of these students are at academic risk because they do not feel accepted due to their race/ethnicity, or are they fearful and feel displaced at the University because of their emotional vulnerabilities? The University has a responsibility to help create “safe places,” where all students can find themselves emotionally, psychologically and physically” accepted for their strengths and their vulnerabilities. A course on Human Diversity can be one such home, even if just for 3-units and just a semester, for students to see themselves and others through a different, more accepting lens. If diversity, in all its varied manifestations is channeled by the University into four racial/ethnic categories, we will fail in our mission to validate the inherent strengths human diversity offers. In the simplest of interpretations, how will the Jewish student feel, the Muslim student or the international student, if campus diversity is defined by four categories. The mere fact the title of this category has changed from “Human Diversity” to “Racial and Ethnic,” clearly communicates an effort by specific departments on campus to corner the major balance of curricular resources for this GE category to their own academic units. These proposed changes come at a questionable time, as well, since it is highly likely all students entering CSULB with California high school diplomas will have completed a statewide required course on racial and ethnic studies. Because the State has wisely chosen to focus curriculum at the high school level to racial and ethnic identity, the University has the opportunity to build on this foundational curriculum and expand students’ awareness and acceptance of practices in their daily lives which strengthen interpersonal and community bonds regardless of color, religion, ability, sexual identity… CSULB’s identity is being forged through its new motto, “No barriers.” This University vision is expansive, and calls upon all segments of our campus to limit restrictive policies and processes, and move students as seamlessly and meaningfully through our curriculum to timely graduation. Unfortunately, the proposed changes to this GEGR Category of Human Diversity is highly restrictive by definition, with a “word salad of justifications” to suggest the policy truly addresses the personal, professional and social strengths students can achieve through attitudes and behaviors which value diversity. In my opinion, the proposed changes have clearly identified what the “In” and “Out” groups of diversity are at CSULB. As a consequence, if approved, these draft changes cause our proposed forward looking motto of “No barriers,” to ring hollow most directly for many of our students, and indirectly for all.


MAIN/KEY ISSUE: As above Graduation Requirements should not be part of a GE policy. Further, the limitation of this requirement to focus solely on race and ethnicity and excluding other forms of diversity is NOT consistent with the campus stated mission of Inclusive Excellence. This course requirement if it is to remain a campus-wide requirement must address a broad spectrum of diversity. Presently it marginalizes certain type of diversity as being less important. This is not acceptable. As a campus we must embrace all forms of diversity - gender, religion, sexual orientation, physical ability status AND race and ethnicity. This course must be a true course on diversity in the US – providing students with real, meaningful and safe spaces to dialogue and learn about all forms of diversity and their intersection with one another in the human experience. To do otherwise is counter to Inclusive Excellence. HUMAN DIVERSITY IN THE US

4.3.1.1.2 RE courses must examine how race and ethnicity shape and determine issues such as, but not limited to, identity, power, privilege, social justice, and resistance as well as life conditions, life chances, distribution of social goods, social equality and patterns of oppression. Courses must include comparisons of discrimination based on race or ethnicity.

4.3.1.1.3 RE courses must provide a comparative treatment of at least two nationally significant racial or ethnic groups identified as oppressed or marginalized. The GRGC must certify any RE course.

4.3.1.1.2 RE courses must also include comparative analysis of similarities and differences of discrimination and oppression of racialized groups and examination of the intersection of race and ethnicity with at least one additional social marker of difference and stratification such as, but not limited to, gender, special needs, age, class, citizenship status, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity, language, or religion.

4.3.1.2 Transfer courses may be accepted as meeting the RE GR requirement if they(a) are courses at another CSU campus that meet that campus’s cross-cultural or multicultural or diversity requirement or(b) are on a list of courses approved by the GRGC specifically formulated to provide examination of racial and ethnic diversity issues.

4.3.2 Course in Global Knowledge and Engagement (Category GK)One of CSULB’s Institutional Learning Outcomes is that graduates will be critically and ethically engaged in global issues as well as knowledgeable about and respectful of a diversity of cultures. To this end, students are required to complete at least three units of course work designated with the GR Category Global Knowledge and Engagement at the upper division. Courses qualifying for this designation must expose students to cultural and social topics and issues beyond the US.

4.3.2.1 Courses in fulfillment of the Global Knowledge and Engagement (GK) GR Category must meet one of the following four criteria:(1) have as their focus the world as a whole as its field of inquiry; or(2) engage in a sustained and systematic comparison between at least two major regions or distinct communities outside the US; or(3) engage in a sustained and systematic analysis of global processes within the context of one major region (broadly defined) outside the US, exploring how these processes operate differently within and across that region; or(4) engage in a sustained and systematic comparison between one major region or distinct community outside the US with one region or community in the US or the entirety of the US.

5.0 CONCENTRATIONSA Concentration is a suggested cluster of courses that can give the student’s experience in the GE Program more coherence and meaning by offering the opportunity to explore (through that cluster of courses) a particular area of interest, to complement and make connections to a major field of study, or to learn more about potential majors. Concentrations may feature themes consisting of a group of courses connected through overarching content. Well-built Concentrations should offer distinctive GE experiences that capitalize on the remarkable assets of CSULB (e.g., its diversity, its location on the Pacific Rim, its strength in the arts.) Concentrations should also enable the creation of informal learning

624625626627628629630631632633634635636637638639640641642643644645646647648649650651652653654655656657658659660661662663664665666667668669670671


How is this defined?


It was the format for GE identified by campus surveys as preferred. Please refer to the survey results sent out to the campus community by email from Norbert. Please feel free to think of suggested alternatives for language rather than "it doesnt work" This is the first draft so nothing is set in stone and the more eyes and contribution to shaping ideas the better!


Agreed.


MAIN/KEY ISSUE: This is not part of the EO and is not well thought out for its implications and implementation. It is also confusing. It should be removed all together. A working committee with full college representation can be formed to better address and outline this aspect of the policy at a later date. There are elements here that have impacts outside of GE, such as scheduling that are not well thought out. It remains unclear how a GE concentration is any different than a minor.


agreed David


I disagree. The spirit of global learning will likely not be met if it is simply "infused" across several courses. Given that this is a CSULB Institutional Learning Outcome, there should be oversight by a university committee, rather than trusting majors to enforce this. I would also suggest that we follow the AAC&U Rubric for Global Learning.


MAIN/KEY ISSUE: As above Graduation Requirements should NOT be part of the GE policy. This course should not be a campus-wide requirement. Adding it as an additional requirement on top of GE and major requirements will add time to degree. If can be infused across multiple courses within majors, via study abroad, etc.

E Eldon, 10/07/18,

Tie to CSULB value of the public good, admittedly writ large.


please bring this up in the meeting so we can add in our proposed revisions


As an LGBTQ researcher, I consider "sexuality" a more inclusive term. "Orietntation" is difficult if not imposssible to define in this context.


Gender used to be required to be examined.

communities by bringing a group of students following a Concentration together over an extended series of courses.

Students need not choose a Concentration to complete GE requirements and may switch Concentrations at any time. However, students can receive recognition for no more than one Concentration.

5.1 Framework Concentrations may be developed by individual departments, by colleges, by other academic programs, or by collaborations among departments or academic programs, and broadly based Concentrations are encouraged. All Concentrations must be housed in one department or academic program (but not at the college level).

Departments and colleges are encouraged to collaborate in identifying thematically linked groups of courses in Concentrations and to schedule such courses so as to facilitate concurrent or sequenced enrollment. Thus, two or more courses from different departments that address aspects of a common theme might be scheduled so that a student could take the grouping in a single semester or in consecutive semesters.Concentrations must meet the following conditions:

5.1.1 A Concentration must include courses from at least three of the five GE Areas: A, B, C, D, E.

5.1.2 A Concentration must include classes from at least two colleges and from at least four different departments.

5.1.3 When faculty create or develop a Concentration, the Concentration must include at least 20 courses, at least five of which must be at the upper division.

5.1.4 Completion of a Concentration must require at least four courses. At least one of these courses must be at the upper division.

5.1.5 Students must take classes from at least three of the five GE Areas, at least two colleges and at least four different departments

5.2 Listing and Review Concentrations shall be described in the Catalog in the department or program where they are housed, and listed separately in a comprehensive list in the Catalog. Prior to publication, a Concentration must be approved by the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council (CEPC). The CEPC will review approved Concentrations every five years.

6.0 GENERAL REGULATIONS

6.1 Only courses on the General Education Master Course List and the Master Course List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements at the time the student takes the course shall count for General Education (GE) and Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements (GR).

6.2 All courses may double-count for the major as well as the GEGR Program.

6.3 There is no limit to the number of units that may be used to satisfy both the requirements for the major and the requirements for GE.

672673674675676677678679680681682683684685686687688689690691692693694695696697698699700701702703704705706707708709710711712713714715716717718719


Add: Where to be found?


Unclear. So if only 4 are needed then they must have one from each of the four different departments?


Confusing. There are 20 courses, but students only need 4 to get the concentration. Why are 20 needed?


That was the same question I had. Its confusing here. How is it that concentrations can be developed by the colleges but not housed at college level?This is confusing


And: Will they go through GEGC and GRGC as well or does only CEPC "know" about them?


How do concentrations show up in the curriculum or catalogue? How are they being presented to students? What is the purpose of developing and adding them? The rationale for and benefit of this overhead could be explained better.


Correct it is not required


Might be scheduled? Does that mean it isn’t required?


What does that mean?

6.4 Where appropriate exams exist, Foundation and Explorations requirements may be met by external examinations, for instance Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate exams.

6.5 Within the GE requirements, no course may be designated to meet more than two Areas or Subareas in the GE Program. Within GR requirements, no course may meet both RE and GK Categories. However, a course may meet the WI and GK Categories or the WI and RE Categories. Courses may also meet one Area or Subarea in the GE Program and one GR Category.

6.6 A course with more than one GE designation may be counted (at the student’s choice) in any one of the approved categories A-E, but not in more than one.

6.7 No course identified in the catalog as available for credit in a graduate program will be permitted for GE credit. Double-numbered courses (400 and 500 level) may not be used for GE credit.

6.8 GE Courses may be offered in various formats and instructional modes and in various time frames. Departments have the burden of demonstrating that the GE objectives and the expectations of student performance are maintained in all formats in which the course is taught.

6.9 Higher-unit GE Courses may not be required, but GE Courses bearing higher units may be allowed to satisfy GE Area or Subarea requirements. Major courses that double count toward satisfaction of a GE Subarea may carry a higher unit than the Subarea requires, but students need to be given the option of completing a lower-unit GE Course.

6.10 Transfer courses may be used to meet the Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the US and the Global Knowledge and Engagement GR only if they meet the criteria in Sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2.

6.11 A student who has been admitted to a baccalaureate degree program is exempt from additional requirements of the GEGR Program if: the student has previously earned a baccalaureate or higher degree from an institution

accredited by a regional accrediting association; or the student has completed equivalent academic preparation, as determined by the

appropriate campus authority.

7.0 UNIT REDUCTIONS IN HIGH-UNIT MAJORSTo achieve a reduction of required GE units for their students, the chairs of departments (or directors of programs) with high-unit degree majors may request—and the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council may recommend, with review by the Academic Senate—a reduction of the required units. A full academic justification shall be submitted by the Vice Provost for Academic Programs to the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs of the CSU system, who shall submit his or her recommendation and the campus recommendation (along with all relevant documents) to the Chancellor of the CSU system. The Chancellor may grant exceptions to one or more requirements for students completing the particular program.

8.0 GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS FOR RETURNING AND TRANSFER STUDENTS

8.1 Students who have not maintained continuous attendance status at CSULB shall be subject to

720721722723724725726727728729730731732733734735736737738739740741742743744745746747748749750751752753754755756757758759760761762763764765766767


Language from the EO. I believe it is in the original policy but i would have to double check.


Is this new? Part of the EO?


Because the goals for graduate education should be different than that of undergraduate breadth requirements.


Why?


Not clear.


KEY: It seems problematic to me to say a course cannot fulfilll a GE category, WI, and either GK or RE. It pushes against the logic of writing across the curriculum and it seems odd to me that we would be unable to address diversity or global learning in relationship to a specfiic discipline.

the GE requirements in effect at the time of their reentry to the university, with the following exceptions:

Previous CSULB students who were under earlier GE requirements and who before breaking continuous attendance needed no more than three additional courses to complete the entire lower-division GE requirement shall be allowed to complete the lower-division GE requirement in effect at the time of the previous attendance.

Previous CSULB students who were under the earlier GE requirements and who before breaking continuous attendance completed one or more upper-division GE Courses shall be required to complete the upper-division GE and GR requirements.

8.2 Transfer students who enter CSULB with full GE certification at the lower division from a California Community College need not complete any other GE Courses except the three upper-division courses, which cannot be met through transfer from a community college. Transfer students who enter CSULB without full GE certification or subject-area (partial) certification from a California Community College must either complete the CSULB GE requirements, or complete and obtain a GE certification from a California Community College which will be honored as meeting CSULB’s lower-division GE requirements. Transfer students must complete the CSULB GR requirements.

9.0 GOVERNANCE OF THE GEGR PROGRAM AND REVIEW OF COURSESThe authority to review and approve courses for inclusion in the General Education Master Course List belongs to the General Education Governing Committee (GEGC), with subsequent review by the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council (CEPC). The authority to review and approve courses for inclusion in the Master Course List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements belongs to the Graduation Requirements Governing Committee (GRGC), with subsequent review by the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council (CEPC). Courses requesting certification for one GE Area or Subarea and one GR Category must submit proposals to both the GEGC and the GRGC. The GE Program as a whole will be assessed by the General Education Evaluation Committee (GEEC). The GEEC will notify the GEGC of all decisions and reports to the PARC. Membership and duties of the GEGC, GRGC, and GEEC shall be specified in a charge by the Academic Senate.

9.1 Review of GE Courses

9.1.1 Departments with courses undergoing review have the burden of proof that the requirements of the Area or Subarea, of the other expectations of the program level (Foundation, Explorations, Upper-Division), and of the course’s contribution to the overall GEGR Program have been met.

9.1.2 Once a course has been approved for GE credit by the GEGC, it will be reviewed periodically by the GEEC. The standard period between reviews is five years. Courses approved for GE that have not been offered within a five-year period shall have GE status removed. Any course that undergoes substantial change requires appropriate reevaluation to remain on the list of approved courses. A request for inclusion in an additional GE Area or Subarea for a course already on the list of approved courses approved for GE requirements requires a review and evaluation of the course for all prior as well as requested GE Areas or Subareas by the GEGC. Except in the case of courses that have not yet been offered, departments may be asked to provide anonymous examples of student work as evidence that course expectations are appropriate.

768769770771772773774775776777778779780781782783784785786787788789790791792793794795796797798799800801802803804805806807808809810811812813814815


Per the EO1100 the university is REQUIRED to create an assessment committee and REQUIRED to assess courses every 5 years. WE don' thave any say in the time period and GE courses can no longer be assessed in the 7 year cycle. Existing courses will most likely have to be grandfathered in and placed on a review schedule to recertify.


Does this mean all courses approved in the old categories would have to be fixed or no longer be within the category within 5 years?Do not understand how this works with the current GE process of evaluating GE’s in the department on the 7 year self-study cycle. This would mean sending all GE courses back to the committee every 5 years they do not currently have the capacity for this. My understanding is even when they were going back to the GE committee previously it was every 7-10 years.


Per the EO1100 graduation requirements are not exclusive to GE. Courses approved for WI, GK and ER do NOT have to be GE courses which means it does not make sense to have the GE committee approve courses that are not GE.


I am referring to 9.0, though this division of GE into two separate categories is introduced earlier.


KEY: Creating two separate GE categories and new committee review process seems unnecessarily cumbersome and problematic in terms of trying to smoothly create and modify curriculum.


If and when it is approved, there would be a box that would autormatically route GE courses to both GE and the GR commitees. Again, not all GR courses will be GE so it will be one certification process for courses that are not being considered for GE.


Key: But it is on the GEGC form? Will there be two separate processes in the future? That will not make instructors happy, to have to go to several committees for that.


As GR rather than GE requirements, courses outside of GE can be certified so your assumption regarding UD B C and D is incorrect. Also, as far as I know any student who wants to transfer to a CSU must meet all the lower division requirements of our native students including political science courses. This is the requirement under the 2012 GE policy and this has never caused an issue. I don't understand exactly what you are getting at here.


Assuming this means they don’t need to do the two poly-sci classes. Only if certified though, they may be AA-T or AS-T without being GE certified. So although this could help some students it means programs would have to meet the unit caps for AA-T/AS-T as if they may have to take the 2 poly sci classes. Suggest that if they Are AS-T or AA-T this could be counted as GE certified, not sure if it works for all the programs. Still need to get Diversity, Global and Writing intensive in their 3 upper division capstones (will be hard as upper division B is rarely in one of these categories). This would mean we need to emphasize course in the Upper Division GE B, C, & D, to also meet one or more (can be WI and Diversity or Global) or the GR requirements, otherwise transfer students are going to be having a problem.

9.1.3 The Colleges must submit materials for each of their courses on the General Education Master Course List for periodic review and evaluation. Failure to submit a course for by the end of the semester following the semester during which the college received a request will be interpreted as a desire to delete the course from the list of approved courses and will be so honored.

9.2 Review of GR Courses

9.2.1 Departments with courses undergoing review have the burden of proof that the requirements of the GR Category and of the course’s contribution to the overall GEGR Program have been met.

9.2.2 Once a course has been approved for GR credit by the GRGC, it will be reviewed periodically by the GEEC. The standard period between reviews is five years. Courses approved for GR that have not been offered within a five-year period shall have GR status removed. Any course that undergoes substantial change requires appropriate reevaluation to remain on the list of approved courses. A request for inclusion in an additional GR Category for a course already on the list of approved courses approved for GR requirements requires a review and evaluation of the course for all prior as well as requested GR Category by the GRGC. Except in the case of courses that have not yet been offered, departments may be asked to provide anonymous examples of student work as evidence that course expectations are appropriate.

9.2.3 The Colleges must submit materials for each of their courses on the Master Course List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements for periodic review and evaluation. Failure to submit a course for by the end of the semester following the semester during which the college received a request will be interpreted as a desire to delete the course from the list of approved courses and will be so honored.

9.3 Assessment of the GEGR Program

9.3.1 The GEGR Program (both GE Courses and GR Courses) shall be assessed for quality and effectiveness in the GEEC.

9.3.2 The General Education Master Course List and Master List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements shall specify the time line for the assessment of the GEGR Program.

9.3.3 Non-compliance with the GEGR Program assessment process for quality and effectiveness will result in the removal of the course from General Education Master Course List and Master List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements.

10.0 COURSE LIST APPEAL PROCEDURES

10.1 A department (via the college) may appeal a decision regarding placement of one of their own courses on the General Education Master Course List or Master List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements. The department (via the college) does this by requesting reconsideration and submitting further information about the course to show why the original decision was incorrect.

816817818819820821822823824825826827828829830831832833834835836837838839840841842843844845846847848849850851852853854855856857858859860861862


Agreed. I believe it should be the departments that are required to submit the data in the new assessment process and not colleges.


Why have both departments and colleges submit the same thing? Not clear who is responsible - the department or the college?


It is not. There will be no more connection to the departmental program review per the requirements of EO1100.


Again not sure that this is in alignment with departmental program review.


What does this mean? Could they do it every year? This needs to be spelled out otherwise the workload could be intense.

10.2 Although the appeal must be written and include all necessary information and arguments, representatives of the department and college may attend the meeting at which the GEGC or the GRGC reviews the appeal to ask and answer questions.

10.3 If a department discovers that one of its courses is approved for GE or GR under a specific GE Area or GR Category and the course is not appropriate, that department must request that the course be deleted from the General Education Master Course List or Master List for Campus-Specific Graduation Requirements.

10.4 If after the appeal referred to above a college still disagrees with the judgment of the GEGC or the GRGC, it may appeal to the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council. If this is done, the GEGC or GRGC will prepare for the council a statement of the reasons for its decision. The college will furnish the members of the council copies of the course justification and the additional materials provided for the committee. All materials shall be distributed to council members prior to the meeting at which the matter is to be considered. Oral presentations may also be made at the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council meeting, if the college wishes.

10.5 The judgment of the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council on appeals is final.

10.6 Disagreements over the implementation of this policy shall be referred to the Curriculum and Educational Policies Council.

10.7 The actions of the committees (GEGC, GRGC, GEEC) and council (CEPC) shall be subject to review by the Academic Senate.

EFFECTIVE: XXX

863864865866867868869870871872873874875876877878879880881882883884885886887888


I think this language is directly from 2012 policy-- i agree it sounds confusing.


Why would this occur in the first place. Does the course not have to be approved by EPC and then CEPC before it is approved by GE?