Undergraduate Course and Program Review Committee

1996-1997 Annual Report to Faculty Senate

Submitted 6 May 1997 by Robert K. Wismer, Chairperson

1996-1997 members	Representing	Term Expires
Cheryl T. Desmond Educational Foundations	Education	1998
John W. Dooley Physics	Science & Mathematics	1998
James W. Fenwick Mathematics	Science & Mathematics	1997
Olga Del C. Iglesias Foreign Languages	Humanities	1997
Judi M. Roller Associate Provost	Office of the Provost
Beverly E. Schneller English	Humanities	1998
Joseph A. Sciarretta, Jr. Developmental Studies	Non-School	1997
Elizabeth A. Thyrum Psychology	Education	1998
Robert K. Wismer Chemistry	Chair	1997
Vacancy	Social Sciences
Vacancy	Social Sciences
Vacancy	Student Senate

Meetings:
The committee met the second, fourth, and fifth Tuesday when classes were in session, except for a Monday meeting on 24 February and one on 21 April. That totals five meetings in the fall 1996 semester and seven meetings during the spring 1997 semester. There were only seven times when any member of the committee was absent, a truly impressive attendance record!

Actions by the Committee:
During the fall 1996 semester, the committee recommended passage of twenty (20) proposals to faculty senate. There were twenty proposals presented to the committee during that semester. During the spring 1997 semester, the committee heard twenty-eight (28) proposal presentations and recommended passage of thirty-four individual proposals to Faculty Senate. One proposal was withdrawn before the committee had a chance to consider it; the chairperson personally requested that the proposal be resubmitted, whether revised or not.

The committee also revised Guidelines for Preparation and Approval of Undergraduate Course Proposals, a copy of which is appended to this report. In addition, the spokesperson for each proposal received in writing (1) acknowledgement that the proposal had been received, (2) confirmation of the time the proposal was to be presented, (3) a statement of suggested modifications, and (4) indication that the proposal had passed the committee and the procedure to be followed for Faculty Senate.

Additional Information/Comments:
The chairperson hopes to place the procedures of UCPRC on the web, so that all faculty have easy access to this information.

The chairperson thanks Don Eidam, Colin McLeod, and Tae Woo for frequent advice and support. He also thanks all members of the committee for their understanding of and assistance to a novice chairperson. Finally, he acknowledges the four dedicated years of service by Jim Fenwick.

Undergraduate Course and Program Review Committee Guidelines for Preparation and Approval of Undergraduate Course Proposals Prepared during March 1984. Revised: June 1990 and May 1997

I. The Course Approval Process (see Governance Manual, pp. 8692)

A. Initiation

1. A single spokesperson is authorized to guide the proposal through the approval process and negotiate minor (see I.C. below) changes in it.

2. The proposal is prepared according to the format described in section II.

B. Intermediate stages

1. Approval of the proposal as presented.

2. Approval subject to certain amendments agreed to by the spokesperson and deemed as minor changes (see Section I.C.). Such amendments shall appear at each stage as attachments to the original proposal unless they are purely editorial.

3. Disapproval. Reasons for disapproval must be clearly stated in writing to the proposal spokesperson. Revised proposals must undergo the complete approval process.

C. Minor changes, Major Changes, and Disapproval

Each committee, council, or department involved in the approval process through any given stage shall be notified of amendments by receipt of minutes and may object to them as representing major changes. Such action will constitute disapproval of the proposal (see Section I.B.3. above).

D. Appeal (See Governance Manual, p. 86)

Should a proposal be twice disapproved by the same committee or council (other than departmental) the initiating department(s) shall have the right to appeal directly to Faculty Senate.

E. UCPRC Procedures and Timetable

F. Recommendation to the Senate

If the proposal is approved, the UCPRC chairperson will return the signed cover page of the proposal with a copy of the proposal, and ask the spokesperson to provide to Faculty Senate forty copies (reproduced double-sided, that is, front to back) of the proposal each with accompanying cover page, and with all amendments incorporated into the text. The proposal will be presented at the next Faculty Senate meeting with the committees recommendations. Senate approval normally follows the two-meeting rule (see Governance Manual, p. 86).

II. Body of the Proposal (A course is proposed and controlled by a department, not by an individual. The use of first-person singular in the proposal therefore is not appropriate.)

A. Catalog Description with Prerequisites

B. Rationale and Supporting InformationDiscuss the following briefly.

1. Present curricular needs this course will meet.

2. Projected enrollment

3. Relationship, if any, between this course and other courses in this or other departments (consider interdisciplinary curricula, overlap of content with that of course in other departments, etc.). If there is the possibility that the content of a proposed course may overlap with the content of a course in another department, the proposal should be accompanied by a memo from the other department indicating that it has reviewed the proposal.

4. Removal from the catalog of existing courses in the event of approval.

a. facts?

b. analytical methods?

c. technical skills?

6. Appropriateness of proposed title, number, and credit hours.

C. Primary Course Objectives

D. Comprehensive Outline of Course Content

E. Criteria for Evaluating Student Performance Indicate the types of items that will be evaluated: term papers, essay examinations, reaction papers, artistic or craft projects, oral presentations, classroom participation, etc. Course grading policies must be in accord with guidelines in the current governance manual (section 3).

F.Required Text and Bibliography (the latter to be four pages or less)

G. General Education Credit?

1. In which block? Humanities and Fine Arts (G1), Science and Mathematics (G2), Social Sciences (G3)

2. Indicate the component of General Education satisfied by this course: Liberal Arts Core, Perspectives, or Additional University Requirements.

3. Indicate whether the proposed course satisfies the criteria for Lab, W (Liberal Arts core or otherwise), C, Q, QARC, or Perspectives designations and attach the appropriate approval forms. (These forms are available from the UCPRC chairperson.)

H. Resources

1. Staff: Does the department possess the expertise to teach the proposed course or are new faculty needed? Please omit references to specific individuals.

2. Library: Does Ganser Library or the departmental library have sufficient resources to support the proposed course? Explain what is needed.

3. Equipment: Does the department or the university possess the equipment needed to present the course? Explain anything that is needed.

I. Other Supporting Materials as Necessary

J. Curricular Issues

To each copy of the proposal should be attached either (1) the completed Curricular Issues form, or (2) a copy of the appropriate Deans analysis of the resource implications of the proposal. A copy of the Deans analysis should be attached to each copy of the proposal that is submitted to Faculty Senate. Return to Faculty Senate Home Page
Return to MU Home Page