Return-path:
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 11:58:42 +1200
From: kellyj@cofc.edu (Joseph Kelly)
Subject: Group minutes
X-Sender: kellyj@ashley.cofc.edu
To: gened@cofc.edu
Errors-to: gened-error@cofc.edu
Reply-to: GENED@cofc.edu
1 December 1996
MEMORANDUM
To: Gen Ed discussion group
From: Martha Runney, Biology
Paul Marino, Biology
Marion Doig, Chemistry
Scooter Barnett, PEHD
Paige Wisotzka, French
Jon Morter, Soc/Anth
Lindsay Packer, Math
Howard Rudd, Business
Joe Kelly, English
Re: Gen Ed
Five of us--Paige, Marion, Paul, Lindsay, and myself--met in October to
discuss the gen ed goals as they are stated in the packets Lynn Ford
distributed to everyone. First we discussed our next meeting. We decided
that, since it is virtually impossible for all of us to get together, Joe
Kelly would distribute the results of our discussion for everyone to
evaluate and append, which he did. No one suggested any revisions.
Discussion:
These are the Gen Ed goals and objectives that have come out of the
faculty-wide discussions so far:
1. To develop reading, writing, and oral communication skills.
2. To develop critical thinking and problem solving skills.
3. To develop familiarity with information retrieval systems.
4. To develop a commitment to intellectual curiosity and lifelong learning.
5. To develop global awareness.
6. To develop an appreciation of cultural diversity.
7. To enhance affective development.
* We want to add "quantitative" to #1. The justification seems self-evident.
* We suggest that "to develop" should be changed to "continue to develop"
or "to perfect" or something similar. We do not want to suggest we expect
students to have developed none of these skills and appreciations before
they come to the College.
* We discussed the issue of a "body of knowledge" at some length. Nearly
everyone agreed that we do expect students to come out of Gen ed with a
body of knowledge, but no one was willing to state what that body of
knowledge ought to be. Marion suggested that rather than requiring every
student to have read Plato or Aristotle or Shakespeare, we ought to require
that every student take at least one course in particular disciplines. He
mentioned that a student could make it through the College without ever
taking a philosophy course. So we went on to discuss the present
humanities requirement, playing with the notion that we require students to
take a lit course, a course in the fine arts, a phys ed course. Paige
suggested we require everyone to know how to swim, which led us to consider
extra-curricular parts of the Ged ed requirement.
* Paige pointed out that the present goals--including #s 5 and 6--need not
dictate corresponding courses in the Gen ed curriculum. If we adopt #5,
for example, that does not necessarily mean we commit ourselves to a World
History requirement. Paige reported that during the Gen Ed committee's
original discussion, members considered requiring students to attend a
particular number of the extra-curricular activities--lectures,
performances, conferences, etc.--offered at the College.
* Paul suggested that we consider a logical sequencing of Gen ed courses,
so what is done haphazardly now would be done with design. Joe asked, for
example, should History 101 and 102 be sophomore-level courses? They
unofficially are now; does this policy reflect a unilateral decision of
the History department, or a reasoned conviction of the faculty?
* We puzzled over the meaning of item #7.
To sum up: the only changes we suggested to the present list of goals are
* add "quatitative" to #1, and
* change "to develop" to "continue to develop"
Joe Kelly
Department of English
College of Charleston
Charleston, SC 29424
(803) 953-4815 fax: (803) 953-3180
kellyj@cofc.edu