Minutes of the Undergraduate Studies Committee

9/23/2014

Attending Voting Members: J. Budiman (CAEE), M. Bauer (CS), G. Pulliam (HUM/CAC), J. Cesarone (MMAE), B. Steffenson (SSCI), R. Trygstad (ITM), J. Twombly (SSB), G. Popovic (MSED), N. Menhart (BIOL), R. Ellis (AMAT), J. Miller (PSYC), L. Coffey (PHYS), S. Lindmark (ROTC), N. Karuri (CHBE), A. Schachman (ARCH),  A.Unni (CHEM), R. Wadhwani (SGA), J. Saniie (ECE).

Also attending: J. Gorzkowski (UGAA), G. Smith (UGAA), C. White (Vice-Provost), V. Foster (Compliance), J. Snapper (Fac. Council), K. Stetz (Dean of Students) C. Torres (ARCH), M. Lopez (One-Stop), A. Hall (Registrar), L. Massengale (Galvin Library).

Absent departments: BME, CAEE, INTM.

Quorum: 12:50

Documents pertaining to this meeting are at:

<http://www.iit.edu/~ugsc/documents/>

Meeting is chaired by Kathryn Spink.

Adjourn: 1:40 p.m. Minutes recorded by Pulliam.

Old business

1) Minutes of 9/9 meeting approved unanimously with no changes.

2)(Spink) ITP Subcommittee to review goals/objectives of ITP courses:

            Steffenson, Twombly, Menhart, Rempfer, Ellis

3) (White) Course and teacher evaluation changes

            To the existing 2 questions, five are proposed to be added:

1. The instructor was easily accessible outside the classroom.

2. The instructor provided constructive feedback.

3. The assignments and tests were aligned with the course content.

4. The class environment encouraged student engagement.

5. The course inspired me to learn more.

(1) Strongly disagree (2) Disagree (3) Neutral (4) Agree (5) Strongly Agree

Some comments: Snapper:  What does 4 actually mean?  Menhart: Should we have peer evaluations of instructors? Spink: members should get department feedback on these questions.

4) Grading policies review subcommittee named:

            Wadhwani, Welter, Unni, Spink

            Charges:

a. Review and propose changes, if any, to the course repeat policy

b. Review NA and I policies and determine if any clarifications need to be made

c. Investigate moving to alternative grading schemes i.e. half-grades or +/-

d. Work with the registrar to find solutions to the final grade deadline and degree conferral date dilemma

 5) (Steffenson) Proposal: return the Social/Behavioral Science requirement in Core Curriculum to minimum 2 300+ courses, now that pre-req issue has been resolved. Vote to be taken 10/14.

6) (Bauer) Information item:  new minor in STEM (Secondary) Education.

7) (Spink) Academic integrity subcommittee members:

            White, Snapper, Steffenson, Stetz, Trygstad, Wadhwani

            Charge: look into existing process for reporting and handling of instances of academic dishonesty with an eye to improving it.

8) (Spink) A review process exists for approving H, N, S designations for Core Curriculum courses.  Ad hoc subcommittees created for this purpose should report their findings (but not necessarily their reasoning) back to the UGSC so those decisions can be properly disseminated.

Adjourn.