Today we will address our single agenda item in a virtual format here on the blog instead of meeting in person.
The School of Information Technology and Computing is proposing that their new course ITC 480 be accepted as the capstone course for their Computer Science and Digital Entertainment Technology degrees. The course has already been approved as writing-intensive.
UUAC met and approved the course itself for creation, leaving their approval of the capstone piece contingent on this committee’s decision.
Below you will find links to the course application as well as a chart outlining the ways the course meets the capstone guidelines.
ITC 480 New Course Application
I have enabled comments here on the blog and invited Dr. Homer to check in regularly to answer any questions the committee might have. Any motions can be entertained in the comments as well.
Thank you for your participation.
Karen Hendrick
11:14 am, 04.26.17
This capstone course seems to meet the capstone requirements. I approve the course and its competencies. Karen Hendrick
Martha Smallwood
11:19 am, 04.26.17
I approve the course and the competencies.
Martha Smallwood
Doug Mendenhall
11:26 am, 04.26.17
A question that arises when I teach JMC’s “Media and Religion” course seems appropriate to ask here as well as I look at the proposed syllabus: Can a student who is not a Christian successfully complete the assignments for this course, or is faith a prerequisite?
John Homer
1:05 pm, 04.26.17
That’s a good question. A student who is not a Christian obviously should be able to complete the portfolio and consider the ethical dilemmas in the case studies. For the final paper, I think that we would allow a non-Christian student to write the paper from the perspective of whatever guiding principle he or she identifies as the foundational meaning or motivation in his or her work/life.
J. D. Wallace
1:35 pm, 04.26.17
So they would not have to write about there major discipline from a Christian World View in the final paper?
John Homer
2:32 pm, 04.26.17
I think that we would ask them to address their discipline from a Christian perspective but they do not have to identify with that perspective. They can identify and consider the Christian perspective, but also state and support whatever beliefs they rely on.
I’m open to suggestions for improvement based on how other departments have addressed this consideration.
Doug Mendenhall
2:47 pm, 04.26.17
I understand that the question I posed has no simple answer. I think that the exact language used needs to be considered, so that a non-believing student has a path to complete the assignments honestly without penalty. For example, the 2012 CCIT recommendations document says an assignment such as this should “demonstrate the student’s ability to think critically about faith and vocation,” which I think is broad enough to let even a very agnostic student pass the course. That’s not to suggest that we want to restrict our principles to please unbelievers, but I also don’t think it’s our intent to use the capstone to wash out all but the faithful.
I’ll vote to approve.
J. D. Wallace
2:59 pm, 04.26.17
I want to be clear that I would not support a course that would have faith as a requirement for completion. But this course’s seems to have it comprehensive assignment doing something that is inconsistent with the course outcomes. Perhaps the course competency #4 should be altered or the assignment modified?
J. D. Wallace
3:01 pm, 04.26.17
Let me try that again …had student come in.
I want to be clear that I would not support a course that would have faith as a requirement for completion. But this course seems to have its’ comprehensive assignment doing something that is inconsistent with the course outcomes. Perhaps the course competency #4 should be altered or the assignment modified?
J. D. Wallace
3:03 pm, 04.26.17
Let me try that again …had student come in.
“This course seems to have its’ comprehensive assignment doing something that is inconsistent with the course outcomes. Perhaps the course competency #4 should be altered or the assignment modified?”
John Homer
11:31 am, 04.27.17
I agree that we can make changes to align the competencies and assignment description, in line with Doug’s suggestion about demonstrating an “ability to think critically about faith and vocation.”
Competency #4 currently expects that students will “Envision life after graduation working in the major discipline with specific focus on global Christian mission.”
We can modify that to be more open to other beliefs, perhaps something like “Envision life after graduation working in the major discipline with specific focus on the interaction between your faith and vocation.”
J. D. Wallace
1:39 pm, 04.26.17
Also the co-curricluar requirement seems to suggest any or all student events whether they are co-curricular or extra curricular. Is that correct?
John Homer
1:57 pm, 04.26.17
We were trying to be broadly inclusive in the list of co-curricular activities, to allow space for activities and experiences at ACU that the student finds meaningful and formative. I’m open to the idea of limiting that list, if that’s preferred.
Greg Brooks
1:40 pm, 04.26.17
I appreciate Doug’s question, that’s been a consideration in Marriage and Family Studies as well.
I approve this proposal.
Greg
Monty Lynn
2:20 pm, 04.26.17
I approve the proposal.
Monty
Nil Santana
2:29 pm, 04.26.17
I approve the proposal
Kenneth Pybus
2:45 pm, 04.26.17
Approve
Rodney Ashlock
3:00 pm, 04.26.17
I approve the proposal.
Stephanie Talley
3:00 pm, 04.26.17
I appreciate the above question as well. In Teacher Education, we state our standard as, “The teacher reflects on how Christian principles can appropriately inform professional development and practice” so that a student who does identify as Christian has the freedom to use their faith beliefs to support their position.
That may or may not be helpful…
I vote to approve.
Qiang Xu
4:45 pm, 04.26.17
Approve
Kyle Tippens
4:48 pm, 04.26.17
I approve the proposal. I think James will do a great job at it!
Becky Hammack
5:04 pm, 04.26.17
I approve the proposal.
Eric Gumm
9:16 am, 04.28.17
It would appear that everyone from our Council has participated in the discussion and/or voting at this point. There are more than enough people who have voted to approve, but technically no motion and second to do so. Therefore, if there is no objection, we will consider Karen’s vote in the first position to represent the motion and Martha’s vote in the second position as the second of that motion and we will consider all of the other votes to approve votes in favor of that motion. That represents more than enough votes to approve ITC 480 to serve as the Capstone course for the CS and DET majors.
Nil Santana
9:24 am, 04.28.17
Agreed.
J. D. Wallace
2:08 pm, 11.16.17
approve