Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
Transfer Oversight Committee
General Education Definition Workgroup
February 25, 2005, 10:00 a.m., ETC Conference Room 317

Present: Jerry Johnson, Michael Spitzer, Annette Schoenberger, Nancy Black, Joan Costello, Debra Japp, Ray Anschel, Greg Mulcahy, Monte Bute, Anne O’Mera

MEETING NOTES

Review Background                                                             
Jerry Johnson requested that general education definition documents provided by Joan Costello be added to the agenda for discussion.

Jerry Johnson noted that the general education definition discussion relates to the MnTC self-evaluation that was proposed in the Transfer Oversight Committee.

Present and Discuss MSCF Draft Definition—General Education           
Ray Anschel presented the MSCF Draft Definition—General Education document which was developed by the MSCF Academic Committee and approved by their Board of Directors.  He noted this document grew out of a three year conversation that was held among MSCF Academic Committee members.  Local campus leaders have not approved the proposal. 

MSCF leadership began to engage in this conversation because they were aware of difficulties that local campus committees were having in handling MnTC proposals.  MSCF leadership decided that they should establish a way to assist campuses in making decisions on MnTC course proposals.  MSCF believes that the general education definition needs to be used as the first criteria to analyze MnTC course proposals. 

Present and Discuss IFO General Education Philosophy, etc.       
Debra Japp presented the IFO’s General Education Philosophy (February 25, 2005) draft document.  She noted that several IFO faculty developed the document and, from the IFO’s perspective, serves as a starting point for discussion.   IFO believes state universities should have flexibility in determining general education.  A sieve, different from the MSCF proposal, is detailed in the document.   

The HLC Commission Statement on General Education (February 21, 2003) was referenced.   A comment was made that the HLC implies that institutions should develop their own definition of general education.  Concerns were expressed about maintaining state university autonomy.  Arguments were given that, in some instances, professional courses ought to be part of the MnTC, especially since state universities embed general education throughout the four-year experience.

A comment was made that the guidelines are absent from the IFO model and may be useful in constructing the MnTC sieve.

A comment was made that two-year colleges are not interested in addressing MnTC issues unilaterally; rather, colleges and universities need to work together.

Some feeling was expressed that a clear mandate and accountability needs to come from the Office of the Chancellor in order to effectively address the MnTC.  Also, clarification is needed on the authority of the Transfer Oversight Committee.

Present and Discuss Dilley General Education definition   and Principles of Good Practice in General Education
A copy of A definition of general education and Principles of good practice in general education was distributed by Joan Costello.  Monte Bute distributed Metropolitan State University’s Review Criteria for GELS.  These documents may be useful resources as we proceed in further discussions.

Concerns have been expressed by faculty that excluding their course (s) from the MnTC will erode their enrollments.

Determine Next Steps                                                                                  
MSCF and IFO will discuss the two definition proposals among their representatives.  MSCF and IFO leadership will inform Jerry Johnson of the results of their conversation.  If MSCF and IFO agree to proceed, further discussion will be held to develop the general education definition (Joan Costello and Michael Spitzer to be included in the discussion). 

Joan Costello will discuss this topic with the Chief Academic Officers and seek their input.

A suggestion was made that, sometime in the future, the Office of the Chancellor hold an in-service/discussion conference with Chief Academic Officers and Curriculum Chairpersons.

Prepared by
Jerry J. Johnson