REPORT OF THE FACULTY SENATE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON GENERAL EDUCATION

DRAFT 4 - for distribution
REPORT OF THE FACULTY SENATE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON GENERAL EDUCATION

INTRODUCTION

In 1996 the Faculty Senate appointed an Ad Hoc Committee on General Education charged to consider what should constitute the goals and attributes of a University of Delaware undergraduate degree and how those goals might best be realized. Made up of faculty from every college and from representative programs and departments throughout the University, the Committee has sought to fulfill its charge in light of the uniqueness of the University of Delaware and in consideration of contemporary national movements and innovations in higher education.

Although we are called the Ad Hoc Committee on General Education we quickly realized that our purpose transcended what is generally thought to encompass general education, namely, distribution requirements and universally mandated courses. Our purpose has been, rather, to consider undergraduate education at this University comprehensively as a total, coherent experience that prepares students for their future lives.

During the two years that the Committee has been at work, other important leaming initiatives have been underway at Delaware. With the assistance of the Center for Teaching Effectiveness and grants from the National Science Foundation the University has expanded Problem Based Leaming (PBL) and has made active leaming a significant part of the undergraduate curriculum, especially in the sciences. A Teaching, Leaming, and Technology Roundtable, established by the provost, has reported on how the University can use technology to advance its teaching mission. An initiative is underway to expand the teaching of writing beyond the English Department and the current Arts and Sciences second writing requirement to encompass writing across the curriculum. A campus-wide committee has been formed to encourage the development of undergraduate students' leadership skills through a variety of means that include credit-bearing courses. These teaching initiatives have informed the work of the Ad Hoc Committee and have our hearty support.

We see these efforts and our own as parts of a single whole that aims to improve the educational experience for all of our students. The recommendations of this report are designed to encourage faculty to adopt problem-based and active leaming techniques wherever applicable, to encourage the use of technology as a teaching tool, to encourage more faculty to require writing in their courses, and to provide more opportunities for students to learn leadership skills through group assignments and discovery leaniing experiences. All of these elements are important touchstones of a unified concept for University of Delaware undergraduate education.

BACKGROUND

The Ad Hoc Committee began its task by asking two related questions: (1) what are the strengths and weaknesses of the University's present undergraduate programs and (2) what are comparable institutions doing to renew and improve educational experiences for their students? In 1997 the University was awarded a planning grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation that assisted us in answering both questions. The Hewlett grant permitted several of us to attend national conferences on general education issues and fimded a speakers' series to inform Committee members and the campus community about initiatives elsewhere. The grant also :ftmded a series of professionally run focus groups that studied faculty, student, and alumni perceptions of the University's present general education program.

The focus groups revealed that University of Delaware students are generally pleased with the education they receive in their major fields, but have a less positive view of the University's general education program. Most felt lost during their first year and had difficulty mastering the skills necessary to make the most of college. First-year students often do not take advantage of the resources available to them and fail to get good advisement. For some this leads to years without a major or to changing majors one or more times. Students caught in these problems are unable to graduate in four years. Even those who move quickly to adopt a major complain about the big, impersonal classes that comprise much of their experience of general education and they fail to see connections between what is taught in these classes and the major that they choose. University alumni also found no intellectual integration to link courses required for general education to their majors. Some alumni said that their education would have benefited from a stronger first-year program that emphasized skills and from better preparation for the "real world."

One part of the current general education program that most respondents found beneficial was the diversity, also called "multicul@," requirement. The General Education Committee concurs in the importance of that requirement and proposes that diversity studies be integrated more fully into the University's curriculum. There are at least two ma or parts to diversity studies: (1) diversity within the United States and (2) the cultures of other nations. The first- year program that we are proposing will begin to address diversity, as can the Discovery component that we reconnnend adding to the curriculum. In addition, we support the continuation of the present diversity requirement with the proviso that there be a thorough audit of the courses that count toward the requirement to insure that they meet the goals of diversity study as outlined in goals 9 and IO below. We recognize that it may be impossible in all colleges and majors to require students to take two courses, one on diversity in the United States, another on foreign lands, but we urge colleges to require courses or comparable experiential leaming in both areas wherever possible. Diversity and global awareness must be addressed in some substantial form in every student's curriculum.

T'he Committee examined innovative general education programs at numerous institutions. In the fall of 1997 we invited representatives of the College of New Jersey to Newark to describe that institution's widely acclaimed core curriculum entitled "Athens to New York" to a UD audience. One week later Carol Schneider, now president of the Association of American Colleges and Universities, addressed a campus audience at Delaware. Her presentation focussed on the problem that large research universities face in trying to bring coherence into their curricula. She noted that the core course solution works well in liberal arts colleges but is impractical in large research universities such as the University of Delaware. Some research institutions have dealt with this problem successfully by adopting clustered experiences that place students in leaming communities and emphasize student involvement in faculty research. Her remarks are further bome out in a publication of the Carnegie Commission entitled Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprintfor America's Research Universities (also known as the Boyer Report) which stresses the introduction of inquiry-based instruction in the freshman year, the removal of barriers to interdisciplinary education, linking skills development to content courses, and a culminating capstone experience to "utilize to the fullest the research and communication skills learned in the previous semesters."

Everywhere the message of curricular renewal has been similar: the loosely structured, cafeteria- style distribution system of general education that universities embraced in the early 1970s in reaction to student cries for "relevance" is no longer relevant. In its place, universities are adopting new structures designed to better integrate and connect knowledge, and to engage learners more directly in research and in the application of what they learn beyond the classroom. Today universities aim to prepare students for life in the technologically sophisticated, diverse, and globally integrated world in which they will live and work. Although the Committee has taken a number of ideas from other institutions, the program that we are recommending for the University of Delaware is uniquely designed to build upon this University's existing strengths. Students receive an outstanding education at Delaware in their various majors. It is the reputation of our major fields that attract many of our best students to the University. We do less well, however, when we present our first-year and general education curriculum to well qualified high school seniors and their families. If the University can provide a freshman-year experience that integrates the breadth and skills associated with general education into the undergraduate experience and provides a clear set of academic goals, we believe that the institution will be better able to compete for the most motivated students.

In the course of our work we also consulted with many campus groups and individuals who provided informative perspectives about the Uni'versity's educational mission. These included Provost Melvyn Schiavelli, the academic deans, several Senate committees, faculty units, and representatives of the Residence Life and Honors staffs. Through this process we learned the curricular needs and constraints of all the undergraduate colleges that make up the University of Delaware. These varied needs informed our proposals. We took seriously requests to simplify what has become an overly cumbersome and disconnected set of individual college and departmental criteria for graduation. In developing our plan we have tried where possible to reduce, but never to increase, the number of credit hours needed for graduation and to make advisement and mentoring more central to undergraduate education.

The report that follows represents the Ad Hoc Committee on General Education's recommendations on how the University of Delaware can restructure its undergraduate curriculum to meet the educational challenges of our times.

GOALS

In early 1998 the Committee wrestled with the questions, what do our students need to know and what must they be able to do? From that perspective we drafted a statement of goals to define the hallmarks of the University of Delaware baccalaureate degree. The statement was presented to the Faculty Senate in April 1998 and later appeared in Update. Senators were asked to disseminate the statement among their department members, and faculty, administrators, and students were encouraged to send their reactions to the Committee. Most responses were favorable. The Committee members have been their own harshest critics and have continued to edit the statement to enhance its clarity of purpose. The final version is: Undergraduate Education at the University of Delaware aims to ensure that every student will:

1. Attain effective skills in oral and written communication, quantitative reasoning, and the use of information technology.

2. Learn to think critically to solve problems.

3. Be able to work and learn both independently and collaboratively.

4. Engage questions of ethics and recognize responsibilities to self, community, and society at large.

5. Understand the diverse ways of thinking that underlie the search for knowledge in the arts, humanities, sciences and social sciences.

6. Develop the intellectual curiosity, confidence, and engagement that will lead to lifelong learning.

7. Develop the ability to integrate academic knowledge with experiences that extend the boundaries of the classroom.

8. Expand understanding and appreciation of human creativity and diverse forms of aesthetic and intellectual expression.

9. Understand the foundations of United States society including the significance of its cultural diversity.

10. Develop an international perspective in order to live and work effectively in an increasingly global society.

THE PROGRAM

To fulfill these goals we recommend that the University of Delaware adopt an undergraduate program that includes four major elements (1) a FIRST YEAR EXPERIENCE to be called PATHWAYS TO DISCOVERY, (2) acquisition of specific SKILLS, (3) a DISCOVERY LEARNING EXPERIENCE to be fulfilled during any part of the student's years at the university, and (4) a CAPSTONE COURSE in the student's major to be taken in the senior year.

1. PATHWAYS TO DISCOVERY will be interdisciplinary thematic courses especially designed for first-year students. The purpose of these courses is to provide an introduction to college study and to the academic resources bf the University of Delaware. Through its thematic approach the program will also instill greater coherence into the undergraduate program and will give first-year students the skills, motivation, and engagement necessary to succeed academically. Each Pathways section will enroll no more than I 00 students, but 80 will be the prefeffed niunber. Each course will carry four credits. Typically, sections will meet twice a week with a faculty member and will meet in smaller groups of no more than twenty each with a teaching assistant for two additional hours each week. Where appropriate, advanced undergraduates may serve as peer tutors to assist student leaming, but they will not be responsible for final grades. Students, including transfers, will be required to enroll in two Pathways courses, preferably during their first year but as soon as possible thereafter depending on the circumstances of an individual's undergraduate program.

All Pathways courses will address goals one, two, three, and six. The courses will also fulfill, or at least address, one or more other goals, particularly goals nine and ten. Each year several Pathways courses will be designated to address goals nine and ten to allow students to meet all or part of the diversity requirement through their Pathways courses. This emphasis on Pathways to fulfill goals is especially necessary to accommodate the needs of those students who are enrolled in highly structured majors that allow for few electives. Portability of requirements among majors throughout the University is another important purpose in defming this proposed programmatic structure.

Pathways courses @ll develop key skills in written and oral communication and in quantitative reasoning. In section meetings students will work both individually and in groups to solve problems just as researchers do. They will learn to use library, computer, and/or laboratory resources as research tools. They will engage in critical thinking. They will use basic mathematics to solve problems, will write several reports that will be graded for both content and writing, and will give at least two oral presentations that will be critiqued for effectiveness.

Broadly stated themes will provide the intellectual framework for Pathways. Several themes can be offered each semester, and themes may be altered from semester to semester to keep the program fresh and to make it as inclusive as possible. The themes for Pathways courses will be chosen for their ability to engage the interests of first-year students, introduce the intellectual resources of the University of Delaware, demonstrate the connections that integrate the various academic disciplines, assist in the development of skills, and provide direction for students' future study and choice of major. Themes that connect to "real world" issues, address the goals statement, reach beyond the resources of any one college, and take a "big picture" perspective on global systems will be especially desirable. Concepts such as Oceans, Justice and Equality, Food, Money, Bio-Ethics, Death and Dying, and the Future are suggestive examples of inter- disciplinary or cross-disciplinary themes that focus on expertise found in more than one college of the University, that offer engaging problems, and that introduce beginning students to potential areas in which they might seek a major and a career.

Themes for Pathways courses will be developed by inter-disciplinary teams of faculty who can assist one another by suggesting appropriate readings from their various disciplinary perspectives, develop joint course objectives, plan teaching strategies, train teaching assistants, craft syllabi and testing instruments, and appear as guest lecturers in one another's classes. Each section will, however, be the responsibility of a single faculty member and that faculty member's department will be credited with the enrollment in the section. Although teaching in the Pathways program will be part of a faculty member's standard teaching load, initial participation in the program will be recompensed with a summer stipend of $2000 to underwrite course development.

Good planning is essential to insure the success of the Pathways program. In its initial phase the University will use its Hewlett grant to provide for a weeklong symposium in early summer or winter in which participating faculty will learn about useful teaching techniques and will receive assistance in the creation of their courses. A compensated training period of three to five days will also be required for the program's teaching assistants in late summer. Participating faculty, teaching assistants and peer tutors will also meet periodically for discussion. In later years the cost of these training and planning programs will fall upon the University's own budget. Support for Pathways would, therefore, be a worthy target for the University's current capital caxnpaign.

To encourage active student participation in the program, to develop learning communities among first-year students, and to expand the boundaries of learning beyond the classroom, some Pathways courses may forge ties with the residence halls. A course that develops such a tie will adopt a particular residence hall to serve as its home base for out-of-class activities. Students enrolled in the course need not live in that hall, but they will be required to take part in the planning and execution of programs related to the course that is sponsored through that hall. These activities might include an evening speakers' series or planning and executing field trips. Our objective is not to interfere with the students' out-of-class life, but rather to use all University facilities as partners in the institution's educational mission and to provide opportunities for student initiatives to develop leadership skills.

The Pathways Program can best fulfill its mission to integrate knowledge and to lead students toward greater discoveries if it is crafted to fit individual student needs. This will require two additional elements: quality advisement and sequencing from Pathways into appropriate next steps in the University curriculum. Advisors will be responsible for steering first-year students into the Pathways courses that best meet the needs of their projected major fields, and, especially in the case of students who are undeclared, into courses that can provide direction into an area that interests them. For many students, especially those who enroll in a college like Arts and Sciences that mandates additional distributive courses, the faculty responsible for each Pathways course will create a list of courses that constitute the next step in leaming in the disciplines associated with their Pathways course.

2. SKILLS

Pathways can provide a model for the inclusion of basic skills that will encourage faculty to include them, and students to expect them, in a broad range of courses throughout the curriculum. In the Committee's judgement students need more exposure to the mastery of skills in writing, mathematics, computer use, and oral communication than can be contained in Pathways courses. In addition to two Pathways courses, first-year students will also be required to take Engl I 1 0 and fiilfill the mathematics requirement of their college or major. In any undergraduate year they will also take at least one course in any discipline that provides significant opportunities to improve their skills in oral communication and one that requires them to master the use of the computer as a tool for research and/or analysis. Although Engl I I 0 and Math 114 (the most commonly selected course to fidfill the mathematics requirement) will be taught separately from Pathways, the themes of Pathways courses will provide opportunities for writing assigrunents and analytical problems that can be defmed in consultation with Pathways faculty. If possible, these skills courses should be scheduled in tandem with Pathways courses so that students enrolled in particular Pathways courses are also enrolled in sections of Engl 1 1 0 and Mathematics that utilize connected content themes.

3. DISCOVERY LEARNING EXPERIENCE

This aspectof the program is designed to address goal 7, which calls for students to "develop the ability to apply academic knowledge to experiences beyond the classroom." These experiences will be structured to link classroom and textbook leaming to the real world and they may be a part of the Capstone course. Examples of such experiences are directed research projects, study abroad, professional internships, and service leaming. The educational benefits of undergraduate participation in research projects, internships, and foreign study need no elaboration. Some majors already require internships. The case for service leaming is, however, less well known. The experiences of other colleges and universities demonstrate that students' participation in courses that include a service leaming component enhances a sense of civic responsibility and self-confidence, advances the institution's mission to serve its state and communities, provides experiential leaming about diversity, and may lead to lifelong civic engagement.

Discovery Leaming should be designed to help students recognize the connections that link what they study in class with what exists outside. That outside may take the form of undiscovered knowledge, or it may be what it feels like to work in the profession toward which one is studying, or how the world looks from a different perspective. Discovery Leaming has the additional objective of helping students to become more self-reliant and better able to grasp the relevance of their university education. A project at the University of Michigan has demonstrated that involving the least well-prepared first-year students in faculty research has significantly boosted their grades and retention rate.

By our estimates about 54% of University of Delaware students currently participate in one or more of these experiences. We believe that all should do so. We also recommend that, where applicable, participation in these experiences can ftdfill more than one goal. Study abroad or a service project could, for example, fulfill goals 9 or I 0. One key to the success of the Discovery Experience lies in good advising to link each student to a project that is appropriate to that student's curriculum. Students should be required to write a proposal for their advisor in which they describe how they plan to use their Discovery Experience to advance their education and address one or more of the University's ten academic goals.

To be done well Discovery Learning cannot be cost-free. The service learning component, which may involve several hundred students annually, will require a coordinator to assist faculty and students to set up appropriate venues for service and to arrange for transportation. We expect that many students who are not already required to undertake an internship as part of their major will choose to do a research project related to their major field or will study abroad. As many as 800 students already participate in foreign study annually and we would expect that number to grow. Both research and study abroad are, however, costly. We recommend, therefore, that scholarship support for Discovery Learning initiatives be cited as major components in the University's capital campaign.

4. CAPSTONE COURSE

The Capstone is intended to bring together the students' learning experiences from Pathways through studies in their major fields and prepare them to assume the responsibilities of their post- college lives. Many majors already require a senior course, often a seminar, that acts as a capstone to the major and a bridge to link college study to the world of work. We recommend that the capstone experience be extended to all students in all majors. In some instances the capstone course and the Discovery Learning Experience will be part of a single entity that includes an internship, a service project, and/or a research project. While the specific nature of the capstone course will depend upon the major, departments and programs should be responsible for the inclusion of discussion of professional ethics as a component in their course plan. The capstone course also provides one fmW opportunity to make sure that students have fulfilled the University's IO goals and that they are ready to take on the responsibilities of educated citizens and professionals in their various fields.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE?

Connections, coherence, and collaboration lie at the heart of everything in this report and they are central to its administration as well. The success of this program will depend more on its acceptance by faculty and administrators than on a big central apparatus. It is our intention that the administration of the program be flexible to accommodate differences in the curricula of the various colleges and major programs. Responsibility for defining the contents of the curriculum beyond the ten goals and four specific elements discussed above will remain with the colleges and departments. We recognize that Pathways, Skills, Discovery and Capstone experiences, however successfully undertaken, can only go a short distance toward fulfilling the IO goals. For this proposed program to be successful faculty must keep the goals in mind in planning every course they teach.

To provide oversight of the program the Ad Hoc Committee recommends that the Faculty Senate create a new standing committee which might be called the General Education Committee. We recommend that the Vice Provost for Academic Programs and Planning be made an ex-officio member of that committee. The committee will be responsible for encouraging faculty proposals for Pathways themes, helping faculty to form partnerships for that purpose, and judging course proposals and planned syllabi to assure that they meet the specifications for Pathways outlined above. The committee will also review college general education curricula and departmental requirements for majors to make certain that they fulfill the letter and spirit of the general education plan.

A Senate committee cannot, however, assume the total responsibility for making the University's General Education program work. As stated elsewhere in this report, Discovery Leaming will reqwre coordination that only an office staff can provide to link students and faculty to external opportunities for service. Likewise, it will take careful planning to schedule Pathways sections with content-connected skills course sections. We, therefore, recommend the creation of an Office of General Education to take responsibility for all aspects of the program. The success of this proposal will depend also on a re-orientation of promotion and tenure guidelines and of other documents relating to faculty responsibilities and rewards to acknowledge the importance of faculty participation in the various activities outlined in this report.

ADVISEMENT

If general education is truly to become the core of a coherent educational experience, we will need an advisement system that is less centered on checking off requirements and more concerned with helping students to grow academically. Faculty often complain that their advisees don't bother to see them. Under this proposed program students will be required to consult their advisors regularly and students will have to take more personal responsibility for meeting the requirements for graduation. We suggest that students be required to keep an electronic journal or portfolio account of all their courses and other educational experiences which they will discuss with their advisors once a semester. In the journal they will keep a record of which goals they have addressed and show proof to support their claims. The most important arbiter of whether a student has met the goals will be the advisor or the faculty member who teaches the capstone course.

It remains the responsibility of the colleges to determine the curriculum for their students within the guidelines of this proposal. We cannot dictate to departments or programs what is best for their majors. They alone will advise their students and decide the content of their Capstone course. We do, however, recommend that the proposed Faculty Senate Committee determine if each unit is meeting the spirit of the program just as the Promotion and Tenure Committee passes judgement on departmental P&T documents.

ASSESSNENT

If the proposed curriculum is put in place, how will we know if it is working and if it needs to be modified? The Committee suggests assessing the impact of the General Education curriculum in three ways: 1. electronic portfolios created and maintained by students, 2. data available from academic program reviews, and 3. satisfaction and other self-reported student data.

A faculty member is currently developing an electronic portfolio method by which students can track their own progress from year to year and share this information with their advisors. In addition to monitoring their progress, students will develop computer skills while creating their electronic portfolio and the portfolio may become an effective supplement to their resume to be shared with prospective employers and to assist faculty in writing supporting letters for graduate school applications.

Data concerning academic departments and programs are already being collected for use in Academic Program Reviews. These data include retention and graduation rates, time to degree, and course consumption patterns. This information will assist in the assessment of the general education prograin's impact on such factors as rapidity in selecting a major, retention, and number of semesters to graduation.

In addition, the effects of the program can be gauged through students' self-reported measures of progress and satisfaction. The Office of Institutional Research administers the College Student Experience Questionnaire (CSEQ) to a sample of students to ascertain their personal development and their satisfaction with their educational progress. Recent alumni also report to the University through the Career Plans Survey which asks them to judge the quality of the preparation they received at the University after they have entered the workforce or post-graduate programs. New questions can be added to these survey forms to evaluate the effect of the proposed program and to detenrnine what modifications to it may be needed.

DRAFT 4 - for distribution REPORT OF THE FACULTY SENATE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON GENERAL EDUCATION