Structural

Reform #1: Do Nothing

Make no changes to the General Education program.
Remove the moratorium on new IN and ID courses.
Resume 5-year reviews of existing IN and ID courses.

Rationale: Our Gen Ed program isnt broken, so dont try to fix it.

Addendum to Structural Reform #1: Specific Feedback from a Faculty

I feel that this process of reform is greatly flawed; however, because it is the process at
hand, I will submit a proposal.
I would like to propose that General Education (GE) at SLCC NOT undergo a major reform
process.
I propose that we look carefully at the GE system that we are currently using and find ways to
strengthen said system without undergoing sweeping changes that may lead to unexpected
impacts college-wide.
I believe that this reform needs to have larger final assessment and approval than just the GE
committee, and that the best place to obtain this larger input is through the school curriculum
committees. Curriculum development is a central key to quality education and I feel that it
should be carefully assessed by the largest possible body of faculty.

1. Carefully define the content criteria for each designation, using input from the
appropriate school curriculum committees.
a. Define, and include in the handbook, a process by which each class will be placed
into a designated category. This process should involve the appropriate school
curriculum committees. The school curriculum committees would approve the
content of the course for a specific designation; whereas the GE committee would
have final approval for the other GE criteria.
2. Carefully define the meaning of the content criteria for the ID designation. The CCO for
any course that is given ID designation should clearly state the two or more disciplines
that the course is integrating.
a. Define, and include in the handbook, a process by which each class will be placed
into the ID category. This process should involve the appropriate school
curriculum committees; however, the GE committee would have the final approval
for a course obtaining ID designation
3. Carefully define the meaning of the content criteria for the IN designation. The CCO for
any course that is given IN designation should clearly state how that course fulfills this
content area.
a. Define, and include in the handbook, a process by which each class will be placed
into the IN category. This process should involve the appropriate school
curriculum committees; however, the GE committee would have the final approval
for a course obtaining ID designation
4. Carefully define the meaning of the content criteria for the DV designation. The CCO for
any course that is given DV designation should clearly state the two or more disciplines
that the course is integrating.
a. Define, and include in the handbook, a process by which each class will be placed
into the DV category. This process should involve the appropriate school

curriculum committees; however, the GE committee would have the final approval
for a course obtaining DV designation

The Northwest Accreditation Team found no issues with our GE. The SLCC GE system is often
referred to as an exemplary model in state and even some national meetings. Thus, I feel that the
underlying format of our system seems to be quite sound. I feel that one of the goals of GE
should be, as it has been in the past, to expose students to multiple ways of thinking, learning,
and viewing the world. The ideas of critical thinking, aesthetics, communication, etc. provide the
commonality among the various GE classes and should allow students to feel the connectedness
of their GE classes. It is in the area of content, knowledge that each class can shine as an
individual type of class to provide that diversity of thought.

I propose that, during the process of rewriting the GE handbook, the GE committee and the
appropriate school curriculum committees look carefully at the criteria for each designation and
record these criteria in a manner that will aid future committees in the assessment of proposed
and reviewed courses. Because the area of content is what separates the courses into the
different distribution areas, it is this content that needs to be assessed by the faculty in those
areas. I agree that no department owns a GE designation; however, I do believe that distinct
schools should be designated, not to own, but to oversee the content of specific GE designations.
For example, it seems obvious that the School of Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) should
have the final say as to appropriate content in courses that receive an SS, HU, or FA designation.
It seems obvious that the School of Science, Math, and Engineering(SME) should have the final
say as to the appropriate content in courses that receive a QL, PS, BS, or LW designation. This is
not to say that a course from outside of the School of HSS cannot receive an SS, HU, or FA
designation, or the composition and American Institutions designations, it only means that the
faculty in that school should be the ones to decide if said class meets the content required to
receive that designation. I have just presented two examples here; the college curriculum
committee should probably assign oversight responsibility for these variations to the
appropriate schools.

Structural Reform #2: Six-Credit Student Choice

Create a new Student Choice Category that replaces the IN and ID categories.
Students take two courses from Student Choice, each course from a different designation.
The new Student Choice category will have the following sub-designations:
Global Learning (GL), which might include the following: ANTH 1030 World
Prehistory (GL) 3; ENGL 2630 Global Literature (LT) 3; HIST 1100 Western Civ. to
1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1110 Western Civ. Since 1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1300 Colonial Latin
America (GL) 3; HIST 1310 Modern Latin America (GL) 3; HIST 1450 Middle Eastern
Civilization (GL) 3; HIST 1460 Modern Middle Eastern Civ (GL) 3; HIST 1500 World
History to 1500 (GL) 3; HIST 1510 World History Since 1500 (GL) 3; HUMA 2300
World Religions (GL) 3; INTL 2040 The Immigrant Experience (GL, DV) 3; INTL 2060
Intl Lit and Culture (LT, DV) 3; INTL 2230 Global French Cultures (GL) 3; INTL 2240
Latin American Studies (GL) 3; INTL 2980 Travel Studies (GL) 3; INTL 2990 Study
Abroad (GL) 3; POLS 2100 Intro to International Politics (GL) 3; POLS 2200 Intro to
Comparative Politics (GL) 3; POLS 2700 Model United Nations (GL) 3.
Personal Skills and Capacities (PC), which might include the following: BUS 1010
Intro to Business (PC) 3; COMM 2110 Interpersonal Comm (PC, HR) 3; EDU 1020
Essentials of College Study (PC) 3; LE 1350 Values and Self Image (PC) 3; LE 1360
Opening Diverse Doors (PC, DV) 3; FIN 1050 Personal Finance (PC) 3; HLTH 1050 Life,
Society and Drugs (PC) 3; HLTH 1500 Lifetime Wellness and Fitness (PC) 3; MKTG
1050 Consumerism (PC) 3.
Technology and Society (TS), which might include the following: BMAN 1110 Intro
to Biomanufacturing (TS) 3; BMAN 1130 Bioengineering in Society (TS) 3; CIS 1070
Living in a Digital World (TS) 3; ENGR 1050 Intro to Nanotechnology (TS) 3; GEOG
1800 Mapping Our World (TS) 3; MUSC 1500 Music and Technology (TS) 3; TECH
1010 Technology and the Future (TS) 3; TECH 1030 Complex Devices Simplified (TS)
3.
Communication, Thinking, and Argumentation (CA), which might include the
following: BUS 1040 Ethics at Work (CA) 3; BUS 2200 Business Communication (CA)
3; COMM 1010 Elements of Effective Comm (CA, CM) 3; COMM 1020 Principles of
Public Speaking (CA, CM) 3; COMM 1270 Analysis of Argument (CA) 3; COMM 1500
Introduction to Mass Communication (CA) 3; COMM 1560 Radio Production (CA) 3;
COMM 2500 Elements and Issues of Digital Media (CA) 4; COMM 2150 Intercultural
Communication (CA, DV) 3; LE 1310 Mind, Machine, Consciousness (CA) 3; PHIL 1250
Resonbl. & Ratl Decsn-Makng (CA) 3.

Rationale: This is a conservative proposal that keeps all existing courses, but reorganizes them
into more rational Student Choice categories that will be relevant to student interests.

Structural Reform #3: Student Choice and Integrated Studies

Create a new 3-4 credit Student Choice category that replaces the IN and ID categories,
with the four designations in option 2 above.
Students take one course from one of the following Student Choice sub-designations.
o Global Learning (GL), which might include the following: ANTH 1030 World
Prehistory (GL) 3; ENGL 2630 Global Literature (LT) 3; HIST 1100 Western Civ.
to 1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1110 Western Civ. Since 1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1300 Colonial
Latin America (GL) 3; HIST 1310 Modern Latin America (GL) 3; HIST 1450
Middle Eastern Civilization (GL) 3; HIST 1460 Modern Middle Eastern Civ (GL)
3; HIST 1500 World History to 1500 (GL) 3; HIST 1510 World History Since
1500 (GL) 3; HUMA 2300 World Religions (GL) 3; INTL 2040 The Immigrant
Experience (GL, DV) 3; INTL 2060 Intl Lit and Culture (LT, DV) 3; INTL 2230
Global French Cultures (GL) 3; INTL 2240 Latin American Studies (GL) 3; INTL
2980 Travel Studies (GL) 3; INTL 2990 Study Abroad (GL) 3; POLS 2100 Intro
to International Politics (GL) 3; POLS 2200 Intro to Comparative Politics (GL) 3;
POLS 2700 Model United Nations (GL) 3.
o Personal Skills and Capacities (PC), which might include the following: BUS
1010 Intro to Business (PC) 3; COMM 2110 Interpersonal Comm (PC, HR) 3;
EDU 1020 Essentials of College Study (PC) 3; LE 1350 Values and Self Image
(PC) 3; LE 1360 Opening Diverse Doors (PC, DV) 3; FIN 1050 Personal Finance
(PC) 3; HLTH 1050 Life, Society and Drugs (PC) 3; HLTH 1500 Lifetime
Wellness and Fitness (PC) 3; MKTG 1050 Consumerism (PC) 3.
o Technology and Society (TS), which might include the following: BMAN 1110
Intro to Biomanufacturing (TS) 3; BMAN 1130 Bioengineering in Society (TS) 3;
CIS 1070 Living in a Digital World (TS) 3; ENGR 1050 Intro to Nanotechnology
(TS) 3; GEOG 1800 Mapping Our World (TS) 3; MUSC 1500 Music and
Technology (TS) 3; TECH 1010 Technology and the Future (TS) 3; TECH 1030
Complex Devices Simplified (TS) 3.
o Communication, Thinking, and Argumentation (CA), which might include
the following: BUS 1040 Ethics at Work (CA) 3; BUS 2200 Business
Communication (CA) 3; COMM 1010 Elements of Effective Comm (CA, CM) 3;
COMM 1020 Principles of Public Speaking (CA, CM) 3; COMM 1270 Analysis of
Argument (CA) 3; COMM 1500 Introduction to Mass Communication (CA) 3;
COMM 1560 Radio Production (CA) 3; COMM 2500 Elements and Issues of
Digital Media (CA) 4; COMM 2150 Intercultural Communication (CA, DV) 3; LE
1310 Mind, Machine, Consciousness (CA) 3; PHIL 1250 Resonbl. & Ratl Decsn-
Makng (CA) 3.
Create a set of new 3-credit Integrated Studies courses (IS) that focus on key
unstructured problems (e.g., Climate Change, The Individual in Society). Students
would be required to take one IS designated course.
No Department can offer more than one IS designated course.

Rationale: This reform keeps the new Student Choice categories from proposal #2, but injects
more integration into Gen Ed by asking departments to come up with one integrated studies
course.

Structural Reform #4: Eliminate Diversity Requirement

Eliminate the Diversity requirement, but not the Diversity courses themselves.
The existing Diversity courses would revert to their primary designation. For example,
ART 1375 Photographing Diversity (FA, DV) would simply retain its (FA) designation.
Begin a conversation about replacing the Diversity requirement with a different
double-dip requirement in Gen Ed, or do away with double-dip requirement
altogether because of its impact on student course-taking patterns.

Rationale: It is unclear what impact the Diversity requirement has had on students. The ideas
inherent in the Diversity requirement are well-infused throughout SLCCs Gen Ed curriculumin
the DV courses and in others that are not so designated. This reform could be coupled with any of
the other proposals.

The Gen Ed Committee dropped this proposal from formal consideration at its March 4, 2015
meeting. The committee felt that this proposal did not have enough support in the feedback it
received.

Structural Reform #5: Expanded American Institutions

Eliminate either Student Choice (Depth or IN) or Interdisciplinary (ID) designations.
Expand the American Institutions (AI) requirement to 6 credits instead of 3. In other
words, to satisfy the AI category, students would take a two-course POLS, HIST, or ECON
sequence.

Rationale: There just isnt enough time in one semester to adequately introduce students to U.S.
history, politics, or economics. Many institutions around the country require a two-course
sequence.

The Gen Ed Committee dropped this proposal from formal consideration at its March 4, 2015
meeting. The committee felt that this proposal did not have enough support in the feedback it
received.

Structural Reform #6: Emphasize Liberal Arts and Sciences (Comm and Argumentation)
Eliminate Student Choice (Depth or IN) and Interdisciplinary (ID) designations.
Create two new institutional requirements, from each of which students would take one
course:
o Global Learning (GL), which might include the following: ANTH 1030 World
Prehistory (GL) 3; ENGL 2630 Global Literature (LT) 3; HIST 1100 Western Civ. to
1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1110 Western Civ. Since 1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1300 Colonial Latin
America (GL) 3; HIST 1310 Modern Latin America (GL) 3; HIST 1450 Middle
Eastern Civilization (GL) 3; HIST 1460 Modern Middle Eastern Civ (GL) 3; HIST
1500 World History to 1500 (GL) 3; HIST 1510 World History Since 1500 (GL) 3;
HUMA 2300 World Religions (GL) 3; INTL 2040 The Immigrant Experience (GL,
DV) 3; INTL 2060 Intl Lit and Culture (LT, DV) 3; INTL 2230 Global French Cultures
(GL) 3; INTL 2240 Latin American Studies (GL) 3; INTL 2980 Travel Studies (GL) 3;
INTL 2990 Study Abroad (GL) 3; POLS 2100 Intro to International Politics (GL) 3;
POLS 2200 Intro to Comparative Politics (GL) 3; POLS 2700 Model United Nations
(GL) 3.
o Communication and Argumentation (CA), which might include the following:
BUS 1040 Ethics at Work (CA) 3; BUS 2200 Business Communication (CA) 3;
COMM 1010 Elements of Effective Comm (CA, CM) 3; COMM 1020 Principles of
Public Speaking (CA, CM) 3; COMM 1270 Analysis of Argument (CA) 3; COMM 1500
Introduction to Mass Communication (CA) 3; COMM 1560 Radio Production (CA)
3; COMM 2500 Elements and Issues of Digital Media (CA) 4; COMM 2150
Intercultural Communication (CA, DV) 3; LE 1310 Mind, Machine, Consciousness
(CA) 3; PHIL 1250 Resonbl. & Ratl Decsn-Makng (CA) 3.
Courses currently designated IN or ID would need to either fit into one of the above
categories, into the existing distribution areas (FA, SS, HU, BS, and PS), or lose their Gen
Ed status.

Rationale: Students need a firm grounding in the traditional disciplines of the liberal arts and
sciences, plus experience with communication and argumentation. This proposal better groups
our courses into seven distribution areas, five of which (FA, SS, HU, BS, and PS) are mandated by
the state. We would be adding Global Learning (GL) and Communication and Argumentation
(CA) categories as institution-level requirements.

Structural Reform #7: Emphasize Liberal Arts and Sciences (Communication and Writing)

Eliminate the Student Choice (IN or Depth) and the Interdisciplinary (ID) designations.
Create two new institutional requirements, from each of which students would take one
course:
o Global Learning (GL), which might include the following: ANTH 1030 World
Prehistory (GL) 3; ENGL 2630 Global Literature (LT) 3; HIST 1100 Western Civ. to
1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1110 Western Civ. Since 1300 (GL) 3; HIST 1300 Colonial Latin
America (GL) 3; HIST 1310 Modern Latin America (GL) 3; HIST 1450 Middle
Eastern Civilization (GL) 3; HIST 1460 Modern Middle Eastern Civ (GL) 3; HIST
1500 World History to 1500 (GL) 3; HIST 1510 World History Since 1500 (GL) 3;
HUMA 2300 World Religions (GL) 3; INTL 2040 The Immigrant Experience (GL,
DV) 3; INTL 2060 Intl Lit and Culture (LT, DV) 3; INTL 2230 Global French Cultures
(GL) 3; INTL 2240 Latin American Studies (GL) 3; INTL 2980 Travel Studies (GL) 3;
INTL 2990 Study Abroad (GL) 3; POLS 2100 Intro to International Politics (GL) 3;
POLS 2200 Intro to Comparative Politics (GL) 3; POLS 2700 Model United Nations
(GL) 3.
o Communication and Writing (CW), which might include the following: BUS 2200
Business Communication (CW) 3; COMM 1010 Elements of Effective
Communication (CW) 3; COMM 1020 Principles of Public Speaking (CW) 3; COMM
1050 Elem. of Human Communication (CW) 3; COMM 1080 Conflict Mgmt &
Diversity (CW, DV) 3; COMM 1500 Intro to Mass Communication (CW) 3; COMM
1560 Radio Perf and Production (CW) 3; COMM 2110 Interpersonal Comm (CW) 3;
COMM 2150 Intercultural Comm (CW, DV) 3; COMM 2500 Digital Media (CW) 3;
COMM 2570 Intro to Visual Comm (CW) 3; ENGL 2250 Intro to Imaginative
Writing (CW) 3; ENGL 2260 Intro to Writing Poetry (CW) 3; ENGL 2270 Intro to
Writing Fiction (CW) 3; ENGL 2280 Intro to Creative Nonfiction (CW) 3; ENGL
2640 Writing and Social Justice (CW) 3.
Courses currently designated IN or ID would need to either fit into one of the above
categories, into the existing distribution areas (FA, SS, HU, BS, and PS), or lose their Gen
Ed status.

Rationale: Students need a firm grounding in the traditional disciplines of the liberal arts and
sciences, plus experience with writing and communication. This proposal better groups our
courses into seven distribution areas, five of which (FA, SS, HU, BS, and PS) are mandated by the
state. We would be adding Global Learning (GL) and Communication and Writing (CW)
categories as institution-level requirements.

Structural Reform #8: General Education Foundations Courses*

Eliminate either Student Choice (Depth or IN) or Interdisciplinary (ID) designations.
Create General Education foundation courses intended for freshmen students.
Make the Gen Ed Foundations Courses prerequisites or co-requisites with certain key Gen
Ed courses to ensure that students take them early.
Each Foundation course would be 3 credits, and students would need to take one.
The Gen Ed Foundations Courses might have the following characteristics:

o Be organized around broad Gen Ed areas such as Writing Studies, Physical and Life
Sciences, Social and Behavioral Sciences, Humanities, Communications, and Fine
Arts.
o Introduce students to threshold concepts in the Gen Ed area that is the focus of the
course.
o Introduce students to the idea of General Education, and contain a set-up
assignment for SLCCs ePortfolio.

Rationale: We want to catch students early in their educational career and provide them with an
intellectually stimulating, integrative educational experience that will help them better
understand the rest of the Gen Ed courses they take. These foundations courses could anchor
First Year Experience learning communities.

* In its original draft, this proposal was called General Education Seminars, which confused some
who read it. Name changed to Foundations Courses, as that is more descriptive.

The Gen Ed Committee dropped this proposal from formal consideration at its March 4, 2015
meeting. The committee felt that this proposal did not have enough support in the feedback it
received.

Structural Reform #9: Emphasize Critical Inquiry*

Eliminate the Student Choice (Depth or IN) and Interdisciplinary (ID) designations.
Replace the ID designation with the four categories in Structural Reforms #2 and #3: Global
Learning (GL), Personal Skills and Capacities (PC), Technology and Society (TS), and
Communication and Argumentation (CA). Students would need to take one of those courses.
Replace the Student Choice (Depth or IN) designation with a discrete number of Critical Inquiry
(CI) courses that would be created by schools, but follow essential design characteristics (see
below).
Students would need to take one CI course at any time in their General Education studies, but we
would try to incentivize students to take them early.
The number of Critical Inquiry courses would be divided as follows: Two courses from the School
of Arts, Communication and Media; One course from the School of Business; Three courses from
the School of Humanities and Social Sciences; Three courses from the School of Science, Math and
Engineering.
Critical Inquiry courses would focus on particular subject matter (e.g., the School of Humanities
and Social Sciences might have one focused on History and Political Science, one on Psychology
and Sociology, and one on the Humanities), but would all have the following common design
characteristics:
o Their content would be centered on a significant reading load of primary source
documents and/or secondary chapters, articles, or websites that explicate substantial
concepts, events, or developments in the subject matter of the course. For example, one
reading in a CI course in physical science might be The Nature of Science and the Scientific
Method by the Geological Society of America. In another example, a CI course in History
and Political Science might assign Frederick Douglass What to the Slave is the Fourth of
July? or Margaret Chase Smiths Declaration of Conscience, among many others. The
readings would not be technical in nature, but intended for a generally educated audience.
o Their pedagogy would focus on two elements:
! Critical InquiryAs developed most explicitly by Brooklyn College (see here and
here), critical inquiry refers to a set of active reading strategies that compel
academically at-risk students to preview texts, take layers of notes from those
texts, and formulate questions from their notes. Students are trained to think of
the act of reading as an activity that requires multiple drafts in much the same way
that they are trained to write multiple drafts of an essay.
! Writing to Learn Activities, which might include informal responses, reflections,
journaling, etc. instead of more formal recall and reporting-based writing
activities.

Rationale: The abilities to read critically and write to learn are perhaps the two most important
skills a college-educated person should possess. One of the key findings of Academically Adrift
was that student intellectual growth was most closely associated with the amount of reading and
writing they were assigned.

The Gen Ed Committee dropped this proposal from formal consideration at its March 4, 2015
meeting. The committee felt that this proposal did not have enough support in the feedback it
received.

10

Non-Structural Reform Proposals

#1: Do Nothing

Rationale: Our General Education program is fine, so dont make changes.


#2: Breadth Alignment with State Practices
Biological Sciences to Life Sciences; Social Sciences to Social and Behavioral
Sciences; Physical Science to Physical Sciences.
No current change to criteria, but criteria language to be revisited in the near future
through a process determined by the Gen Ed Committee.

Rationale: These changes would be in accordance with the terminology used in the Board of
Regents R.470 document on General Education.


#3: HIPs in General Education
Change the Gen Ed 5-year course review process to encourage departments to emphasize
high impact educational practices.
Charge the FTLC and the Office of the Gen Ed Director with fostering HIPs.
Showcase student HIP work in their ePortfolios.

Rationale: This reform would improve our Gen Ed program by infusing it with the kinds of
educational practices that have been shown to engage students and improve their learning.


#4: Clearer Pathways in General Education
Define a relatively few number of meta-majors (e.g., Health Sciences, Business).
Within each meta-major, define a set of General Education courses that are recommended
to students.
This would essentially be a different way to package Gen Ed for students who have a
major outside of General Studies.

Rationale: The purpose of this reform is to help students make choices in General Education if
they have declared a major.

#5: Writing in General Education Courses
Make the following changes to the Gen Ed course review criteria:
o Emphasize writing to learn activities as the basis of the writing requirement in
1000-level courses. (Writing to learn activities include informal responses,
reflections, journaling, etc. instead of more formal recall and reporting-based
writing activities.)
o Emphasize writing from research activities in 2000-level courses.

Rationale: The purpose of this reform is to help students to help students achieve the Effective
Communication, Substantive Knowledge, and Critical Thinking learning outcomes.

11