Transfer issue/problem one:

Finding the balance or a middle ground on credit/student transfer: 

• Potential program duplication with Associate in Fine Arts (AFA).

Strategy(s) to address transfer issue/problem one:

Move forward the concept of articulation from institution by institution as outlined in draft proposal with the understanding that more feedback from faculty is necessary.  This group needs to reconvene soon, preferably by mid-June. 

 

Transfer issue/problem two:

Communication and information sharing of curricular expectations of MnSCU institutions and the Office of the Chancellor:

• From administrators on campus.
• Expectation of the AFA and the impact on receiving universities.

Strategy(s) to address transfer issue/problem two:

• Develop a discipline website where students can view course/program bulletins to know timing and articulation of programs. 
• Improve communications of institutional practice on evaluating student abilities and related placement. 
• Provide support at the system level and within individual campuses for portfolio development, efolio and related training. 

 

Transfer issue/problem three:

• Forum for continuing dialogue.
• Agreed upon standard for students.
• Build upon niches.   

Strategy(s) to address transfer issue/problem three:

Request that resources be provided for continued discussion among faculty groups on at least an annual basis.  

Brainstorming Notes from Music Discipline Meeting

Friday, April 11, 2003

Course Content Discussion

• Elements of programs across institutions differ from music theory, ear training, music technology, and other areas
• Common challenges of meeting national standards, accepting students at different levels, ensuring that courses are sequential and articulate well, and the 128 credit limitation.Page 2.  Music Discipline/Department Report from Meeting of April 11, 2003

System Articulation and Programmatic Issues

• Discussion about expectations for a uniform set standards and communication of the standards and what specialization should occur across institutions
• Big issue – are the universities and colleges sub units within one large institution (system as a whole) or are they autonomous and separate.  Need the answer to this question to discuss other issues.

Student and Institutional Assessment

• Is it possible to have a common standard?  Programmatic or course by course?  The receiving universities still maintain assessment, admission standards.
• Discussion about placement and auditions in theory, performance area and history
• Is there a more effective way to share expectations and practices of receiving institutions?
• Institutionalized, not necessarily standardized
• National standards are amorphous, self-evaluative; content and curriculum percentages are required
• Discussion about assessment and portfolio development and sharing of results or documented standards
• e- portfolio does not have enough space for audio/video to meet music’s needs
• faculty training

Associate of Fine Arts

• Need further clarification on what the difference is between an AA with named emphasis and the intent of an AFA
• Concerns about redundancy of major courses, students competing for degree programs, some universities concerned about the potential decrease in size of their 1^st and 2^nd year courses
• Is the program proposal from Normandale CC a basis for the AFA and what are the expectations for universities, other than the agreement with MSU, Mankato, to accept this program?
• Need to have the opportunity to discuss with faculty at their own institutions and reconvene this group to further discuss development of an AFA