Collective Table Responses – Question 1. What are the strengths of the student's integrated and universal essential education (distribution) proposal?

 

-Friendly to transfer students

-Counts some courses in their major

-Diversity

-User friendly to all students

-Flexible scheduling

-Very arhns parent

-A great dice of student agency

-Exposes students to more/varied disciplines

-Quantitative literacy

-More flexibility w/transfer in and out

-Eliminates distinction b/t intro and dist. courses

-Differentiates between BA and BS

-More science for B.S.

-Emphasis on competency early on

-We like the general design

-Best for transfer, part-time, summer students, and those switching majors

-Most feasible to inplenet

-Least risk of changing major that doesn't work

-Clear BA/BS

-Overlap of gen eds w/ majors is good

-We like the health optice

-Realistic and flexible

-Maximizes student choice

-Ties very well with the majors

-Clarify and practical nature

-Better resource utilization

-Good distinction between BA/BS

-Suits professional schools

-A familiar system that could be implemented easily

-It is very transfer friendly, a must for the mission of SIUE

-The four basic requirements are clearly delineated along

-The BS degree is totally divested of “BS” in this system

-Reducing the size of the IS courses is ideal

-More bredth; includes basic core

-Easy to understand, transfers well, students know what they will learn

-Focus on communication (written and oral)

-This model meets the education and nursing requirements

-Great to cap courses (but maybe realistically some of them)

-Most easily levitated since it is worst ? least disruptive in terms of resource reallocation

-Better accommodates the needs of transfer students

-Requiers the student to tke courses in wore area than does the current model

-Exposure to breadth of areas

-May be less painful to implement-closer to existing structure

-Can integrate existing courses, books

-Probably cleanest

-Easy to communicate to students

-Early incorporation of skills courses

-Transferability

-Organized structure

-Quanliture literacy foundation great

-Multiculturalism great

-Presentation of freshman semester

-Doesn't appear to increase units to graduate (especially not for engineer dept.)

-Strength in integration

-The level of the ownerships from students

-Based on the existing proposal, there are no dramatic changes for the university

-Faculty expertises

-It allows over lap. It can help the graduation rates.

-Flexible. Easy to follow. Sequencing. Physical science distinct from life sciences. BA/BS distinction clarified.

-Flexible

-Overlap

-Quantitative literacy=good

-We can understand this proposal

-Intergrades better c community colleges. Serves our students better

-Easier to see relationship c current system

-Transition easier to accomplish. Less new resources

-Courses can integrate into major allows overlap.

-Makes sense, cuary laid out

-Easy writing courses

-You can test out of some basic classes

-Quantitative literacy

-Distinction between BA and BS

-Speech 105 requirement good

-Easiest for transfer students

-Smaller class sizes (Especially in IS)

-Strengthening of BS degree and equalizing of BA degree requirement

-Allows more overlap between general education and major

-Like the breadth

-Flexibility

-Easier to understand

-Gives students freedom of choice better for transfer students because of flexibility

-Foreign Language requirement pairedo/lab requirement. Connecting the B.S. and the B.A.

-Flexibility of overlaps

-Better chances for advisement if student switches from B.A./B.S.

-Preparation for transition to college

-Students are required to take 2 lab sciences for BS and for BA you can not proficiency out of you language

-Economically possible

-Areas divided up a little bit more

-Assess student's computer/technology efficiency

-More diversity and learning across the academic areas

-Modeled after current system

-Allows students to overlap major requirements with gen Ed

-Allows for student choice-channeling interest

-Flexibility for individual departments to control classes for major

-Expands breadth requirements to 5 from 3

-Doesn't really tax existing university resources or bureaucracy

-Have to pass writing classes more strongly than the other models

-Reduced # of hours as a strength

-Implemental with the min. amount of resources

-Easy articulation with community colleges

-Integration of study of International cultures/subcultures in the U.S.

-Allowance of proficiency out of certain courses

-Easier to transition

-Allow pairing down to 120 MS.

-Serve state better with IAI collaboration

-Requires com quantitative literacy

-Low budget implication

-Protects 111 courses in disciplines that aren't taught in high schools

-Flexibility

-Appreciate focus on culture

-Appreciate BA/BS distinction

-Logical structure, easy for all to follow

-Easy to adopt

-Easy to transfer in or out

-Relevance of freshman seminar

-Minimal strain on resources

-Does the best job of the 3 alternatives of incorporating transfer students under IAI agreements

-Flexibility of choice for students

-Language and lab components that cannot be proficiencied out of

-Speech 105 is important as students need this skill

-It is individualized and flexible

-Critical thinking taught early

-Smallest amt. of administrative change and cost for reprogramming of the Banner system would be capped.

-Lab courses can be handled better c some options available

-Potentially implemental

-Allows better segue into gen ed for transfer students

-Least disruptive and most efficient compared to current model

-Most supports students transfering in and out

-Requires 1 year foreign language c different levels for BA, makes BA/BS distinction.

-More student-driven choice-allows them a greater chance to success.

-Reduces is course sizes

-Ease of implementation

-Least upheaval of current program

-Most practical to do

-Proficiencies still require advanced placement

-More breadth of courses

-Simplicity-easy to understand

-Easiest to implement

-Diverse

-Builds on strengths of current program

-Less confusing structure for students

-Value apparent to students

-Separates sciences-Life science and Physical science

-Obvious focus on diversity and culture

-Organized plan

-Easy to understand

-Easier to implement

-Improvement w/o reinventing the wheel

-Good for advanced students

-Addresses level of diversity of student prep

-Good use of support services and academic

-Quant lit. is good

-Students can apply gen ed reqs. to major

-Students need more math and science

-The breadth areas as currently configured seem to be strength

-Very transfer friendly

-Very well thought out

-Administratively more tractable and less resource intensive than alternative models

-Its simplicity renders it more understandable and hence easier to adopt across discipline options for BA and BS

-Easiest to understand

-Fewer credit hours

-US and international cultures

-More breadth

-Can take either lower or upper level breadth

-Less info on “intro” classes

-Works with Banner

-Familiar and lest radical

-Very transparent

-A great deal of student agency

-Transfer-“can't read”

-Lab requirements for BS

-Language requirements for BA

-Advanced coursework counts toward Gen Ed

-Flexibility

-Feasible

-Have to pass writing classes more strongly than other models

-Breadth areas ensure that most areas covered

 

 

Collective Table Responses – Question 2. What would make the student's integrated and universal essential education (distribution) proposal even better?

 

-Systematic assessment of change

-More qualitative analysis be integrated, more reflection on data

-Need requirements for non technology

-Computer literacy is lacking—needs to be strengthened

-Freshmen seminal should be 1 credit -once a week meeting for 1 st semester should suffice

-Make sure this corresponds to other campuses- articulation agreements

-Total # of hours exceeds current requirements; ex. ME

-Transfer in and out of SIUE should be considered

-Courses here should “match” other institutions to assist students in their transfer

-Foreign language should be required for BS also (Proficiency ok)

-Technology perhaps considered

-Environmental stewardship should be addressed

-Speech Communication classes would be reversed, requiring 80 sections of Public Speaking and 30 interpersonal (opposite of now)—(requires major infrastructure $ support)

-Needs more integration of coursework-less intellectually challenging

-Consider meeting breadth requirements with one intro and one advanced course in discipline

-Create “computer center” in lieu of technology course along same lines as writing/speech centers

-Clearer advising tools for students so that they understand how system works

-It would make it stronger to have a gateway class component

-Take the first paragraph of the executive summary and the LL one and put it on top of distribution-that would be a better plan

-Technology-needs some component-computer, technology, literacy

-Library/research education component?

-Seems to be less “liberal”

-More science for BS students

-More language for BA students

-Maybe should be true the other way around?

-Less labs and fees for students (ie. Increasing lab courses increases cost to SIUE and students)

-More equipment is also needed

-Include a request for hidden cost increases that could hinder this model

-Include health component and the computer/ tech. component is necessary now

-These two arenas are needed for students who do not have computers at home and need to be educated re: health issues for life

-Flexibility of choice, in that students may have too much freedom when they are uncertain freshmen

-No technology requirement

-No health requirement

-Worried about credit-hour reduction becoming an end in itself

-Keep up with choice of SPC 103, 104 or 105

-Lab science not practiced with limited space

-Increase the # of hours of residency of the university

-A gateway course

-Problem: resources for science labs

-Is this enough of a change?

-Offer IS classes at different levels (200-300 etc.)

-Better classification of what makes a required class

-Shifts burden to skills courses from 111 classes/ erases distinction between skills and intro classes

-Larger administrative burden for departments and grad checks

-Flexibility can be confusing and overwhelming

-CMIS is omitted and should be included in general education in some form

-Programming lab, ex: CS 140 to be added to the physical sciences

-There is some concern that there is little chance for students to take additional hours in a breadth area as an elective

-With no overlap, there would be little opportunity to explore further areas of interest

-Perhaps the model could spell out how this could be aligned with overlap

-Perhaps students could select a subset of the breadth areas (e.g. 4 of the 6)

-More specified computer literacy/ technology

-Computer technology course must be added-student should be allowed to test out of it

-Flexibility in choosing courses could cause difficulty in student selection (assume students know what they need)

-Short-changed health

-Added 2 culture courses-should be integrated into 1

-What kind of strain would it put on instructional services (Proficiency test)?

-Require at least a proficiency exam for health and technology

-All departments would be included in breadth, right?

-No information literacy

-Info literacy should be like IGR—integrated across the curriculum

-Need information literacy

-Need to reduce number of hours required for graduation

-Connections between component parts not clear

-Students and faculty would appreciate more clarity here

-Making up hours after taking proficiency courses

-Computer literacy skills-test out of skills course

-Flexibility not as apparent as suggested

-Do not believe breadth/ diversity achieved when major/ minor can overlap with gen ed requirements

-Requirements for not including proficiency exams and requiring upper level language requirements may reduce # of BA degrees

-No 111's

-Need to address technology: list courses as physical sciences or make new breadth are called mathematics/ computation

-Students choose 6 out of 7 breadth areas

-Undermines Education Degree and secondary education programs

-Eliminate all restrictions on proficiencies

-Maybe 2 labs is too much for BS, maybe 1 lab will suffice

-If possible, reduce the Diversity requirement to 1 cause

-Maybe only links causes

-Needs a technology component

-Unclear about “additional component”

-Course requirements in junior/ senior years are not correlated to some major

-The administration must commit the sources to make the IS proposal work

-Add a computer/ technology requirement

-Freshman Seminar could include wellness/ fitness, technology, campus resources including research skills (discuss plagiarism, honesty, ethics), include community service

-Should include lab science for BS and BA

-Allow students to test out of foreign language requirement if bilingual

-Check out Western Illinois —all freshmen need 1 course that is also designated as freshman seminar

-Could something be added to enhance the integration requirements of this proposal?

-Computer proficiency exam for all incoming freshmen and transfer students

-Students who fail the proficiency should take CMIS 108 or equivalent

-Focus on outcomes—goals of baccalaureate—need to assess the desired goals

-Only allow truly ‘appreciation' classes (not intro to guitar)

-Gear requirements to classes that are not developmentally based of that eliminate breadth

-e-literacy: give appreciation that technology is changing; acknowledge diversity of computing backgrounds

-Computer technology courses should be added as a requirement for science and engineering major students

-More responsibilities from student advisor because students might not be able to make their decisions on which courses to take

-I'd like even stronger restrictions (less flexibility) regarding

-Does not seem to be as “leading edge” as other models as it relates to “integration across discipline silos”

-May not work as efficiently—guidance system needed

-Philosophy based critical thinking should be required

-Work in computer literacy

-Not as unique

-Simplify charts, etc. so easier checklist for advisors and students

-Make easy for students to figure out what meets what

-Add health requirements

-Could have requirement for technology @ higher level if necessary

-Students can get by with only taking intro courses --> may take easy way out --> provide more guidance

-Proposal courses of study for gen ed --> students can choose proposal one so classes fit together better but would have a choice --> would lay out a more integrated plan

-Lesser development requirement beyond IS

-Not a lot of integration

-Technology

-Make sure writing is across curriculum—has to be central

-Do not allow lower division courses to satisfy breadth requirements

-Had outstanding integration across curriculum

-Freshmen seminar experience should be interdisciplinary