Attending Voting Members: Promila Dhar (BME), Jim Edwards (ROTC), David Gidalevitz (PHYS), Boris Glavic (CS), Erin Hazard (HUM), Steve Kleps (CAEE), Kathiravan Krishnamurthy (FDSN/Vice Chair), Nicole Legate (PSYC), Yuting Lin (BIOL), Yuri Mansury (SSCI), David Maslanka (AMAT), Kathy Nagle (ARCH), Victor Perez-Luna (CHBE), Ray Trygstad (ITM/ Secretary), John Twombly (SSB), Murat Vural (MMAE), Fred Weening (Chair), Ben Zion (CHEM)

Also Attending: Jennifer deWinter (LCSL), Robert Ellis (AMAT), Diane Fifles (University Accred), Natalia Gallardo (Registrar), Joseph Gorzkowski (UGAA), Kyle Hawkins (AMP), Mary Haynes (UGAA), Pam Houser (INTM), Jasmine Johnson (UGAA), Melanie Jones (Armour Academy), Christopher Lee (Registrar), Melisa Lopez (Student Success & Retention), Gabriel Martinez (Armour Academy), Tracey McGee (ELS), Abby McGrath (Enrollment Services), Nick Menhart (CCAC), Nichole Novak (Libraries), Shamiah Okhai (LCSL), Joseph Orgel (VPAA), Georgia Papavasiliou (Armour), Hannah Ringler (HUM/CAC), Zipporah Robinson (Academic Success), Gabrielle Smith (UGAA),  Kathryn Spink (Past Chair), Fareine Suarez (UG Admissions), Mary Jorgenson Sullivan (ELS), Liad Wagman (SSB/CSL) 

1. Approval of minutes from the 4/25/23 meeting was moved by Kathiravan Krishnamurthy and seconded by John Twombly. 
   The motion passed unanimously.
   
   
2. Updates from Academic Affairs.
   Joseph Orgel’s remarks in summary:
   We should celebrate collaborative governance.
   The university is looking good in recruitment goals.
   The incubator program or new degrees has gone so well that graduate studies wanted in.
       The incubator program allows quick prototyping of degree programs.
   Updates:
   Progress in updating of the CIM infrastructure looks good but it will take time.
       We are changing a number of things to provide greater stability on operating systems.
       We will have rubrics for admissions and assessment.
       We will have a pathway for compromise and collaboration in the event of a veto.
       We have a strong history of collaboration so this has not been a major issue.
   My role at Undergraduate Studies Committee is to represent my office.
       I am only ex officio and I will only interject when I can help.
       We will be introducing new items at the next meeting.
   
   
3. John Twombly brought forward the BS in Economics and Business Analytics and the BS in Economics and Data Science proposals to be considered together. He noted that the Economics and Data Science is the more quantitative of these proposals with heavy CS emphasis, while the Economics and Business Analytics is more qualitative with greater economics emphasis. John Twombly then moved for approval of both degrees. 
   The motion to approve these degrees was approved by a vote of 17 to 0.
   
   
4. Erin Elizabeth Hazard presented a proposal for changes to the Humanities Core Curriculum. 
   A discussion of the proposed changes followed.
   
   Humanities noted that the change in C-coded Communication Across the Curriculum courses would reduce the total required hours to 18, with 6 hours of C courses required in the major department; this is comparable to peer institutions.
   
   Joseph Orgel commented that we would like to know origin of the proposal, that it needs to be presented to academic units, and that we need to hear input from the academic units. The answer from Erin Hazard was that the proposals were put together by Humanities faculty and this is the initial introduction; Hannah Ringler, Director of Communication Across the Curriculum made the argument that this makes it stronger.
   
   Ray Trygstad expressed a concern that the new criteria for C-coded courses had no mention of being able to create a thesis statement; the response was that the lack of specific emphasis on thesis statement is more in line with current practice in the filed which emphasizes argument but not specific expressions such as a thesis statement.
   
   Boris Glavic asked about non-humanities courses being allowed to apply as humanities; in the discussion concern was expressed that departments might be expected to create humanities courses in their discipline. Humanities responded that the intent is recognize work already done in other disciplines that already could reasonably be recognized as humanities.
   
   Mary Jorgenson Sullivan noted that the number of proposed learning outcomes in C courses is very challenging as each must be recognized, and suggested maybe it would be better combine possibly outcomes 2 and 6, and 4 and 5. Hannah Ringler reply she will be responsible for C course assessment and was prepared to assess all outcomes as drafted.
   
   Liad Wagman had a process question as to whether other academic units had a role in this. Joseph Orgel replied that academic units can reply based on this proposal, and he believed that that there must be at least one Town Hall.
   
   Gabrielle Smith asked about the writing requirement through AP or transfer credit. Will all students be required under this proposal to take a composition course? Will there be separate course for non-native speakers? Hannah Ringler replied that the new composition courses will replace HUM 200 and all students will take an introduction to composition course based on level of support that their writing needs.
   
   In response to a question from Ray Trygstad about the removal of upper-level humanities requirements, it was noted that allowing all Humanities courses be at the 100 and 200 level to meet Core Curriculum requirements was in line with both normal practice and Illinois Articulation Initiative (IAI) expectations.
   
   Katie Spink asked for clarification that COM 150/151 would replace HUM 200, and noted that it appears that if departments do not have a humanities course as part of their major, this proposal could actually increase the total hours required to complete a degree. She suggested that H-designation learning outcome changes, C-designation learning outcome changes, and Core Curriculum Writing and Communication changes be considered separately and not as part of the same proposal. The Chair closed discussion on this topic at this point.
   
   
5. Jennifer deWinter presented on behalf of Carly Kocurek—who could not be present—a proposal to reduce the minimum number of hours required to complete an undergraduate degree at the university from 126 hours to 120 hours. During discussion of the proposal it was noted that this is more in line with peer institutions and is what parents are coming to expect in a four-year degree program. The concern was expressed that students are forced to overload to graduate in four years but in the discussion other faculty members noted that while it may require multiple 18-hour semesters to graduate on time, this is not an overload and students do not have to take an overload to graduate on time.<

The Chair then noted that time for the meeting was at an end. Boris Glavic moved to adjourn and Yuri Mansury seconded, and the Chair adjourned the meeting at 1:47pm.