Today we will address our single agenda item in a virtual format here on the blog instead of meeting in person.
The Art Department has proposed that ART 325 – Art History: Christian be considered for inclusion on the Historical Literacy menu.
Please enter your questions and comments in the comment box below after you have reviewed the proposal. I have asked representatives from the Art Department to participate in the discussion as well.
Kenneth Pybus
6:27 pm, 11.07.17
The corse looks good, though am I overlooking the assessment method that’s part of the Criteria for the Historical Literacy Menu? Otherwise, it looks to satisfy other criteria.
Also, I learned a new word – evince. Thanks, Dan and Mike!
Kenneth Pybus
6:42 pm, 11.07.17
*course
Doug Mendenhall
8:31 pm, 11.07.17
I have no reservations about the course as described. I do wonder whether it would be appropriate as an elective for non A&D majors (particularly Bible) or whether the level of art knowledge required would preclude that.
And also I wish I could enroll.
Monty Lynn
8:29 am, 11.08.17
I have no reservations.
David Kneip
12:39 pm, 11.08.17
As a new member of the council, I wonder if there is an easy answer to this question that I’m just missing — but I’ll go ahead and put it out there:
I see the page in the document that outlines the answers to the criteria listed under part 2 of the “UGEC Criteria for the Historical Literacy Menu”; however, I cannot find information that answers the request for assessment measures for the overall SLO and the General Education Competency (part 3 of the UGEC doc). Is that information available in the document, or has it simply not been included here?
Karen Witemeyer
1:07 pm, 11.08.17
I have sent an email to Mike Wiggins and Dan McGregor asking for clarification on the assessment question.
Dan McGregor
3:29 pm, 11.08.17
Hi, All-
Thank you for taking the time to look this over! The current materials are all that we are able to submit at this point. Feel free to accept or reject this based on the current state of the document (and no hard feelings if the latter).
Kind regards,
Dan
J. D. Wallace
3:41 pm, 11.08.17
Since the assessment has not been included does that mean that this is tabled until such time as they can be provided or are linkages of proposed assessment and SLOs enough? Do we have those linkages?
Leslie Boiles
3:59 pm, 11.08.17
I have no reservations about the course as described.
Kyle Tippens
4:46 pm, 11.08.17
I’ll echo David and claim to be a new-ish member of the UGEC also.
I went back and looked at the precedents for approval for the Historical Literacy menu. On 3/23/16, the UGEC approved THEA 490 for the menu. My reading of that proposal was that it was very similar to the one we have to consider here, in that the “Part B” of the “UGEC Criteria for the Historical Literacy Menu” was met in depth, but the “Part C” (dealing with SLOs/Assessment) was not addressed much. On 4/12/17, the UGEC discussed the addition of HIST 280 to the Historical Literacy menu. When I review that proposal, I would say that “Part B” of the UGEC Criteria was effectively missing (at least the explanation of how those criteria were to be met by the course), while “Part C” of the UGEC Criteria were addressed in the proposal, at least partially. (The UGEC approved that proposal also.)
I know Dan, and I too would like to sign up for the course, and I have no doubt that it will be an excellent course and the SLOs will be great and assessment will be wonderful. I have no problem agreeing to this course being added to the Historical Literacy menu. But I suggest that either the UGEC takes their “UGEC Criteria for the Historical Literacy Menu” seriously (and more literally), or we approve courses with the understanding that they appear to meet the spirit of the criteria. The precedent to date suggests that the UGEC has taken the latter approach. I think we should attempt to be consistent.
Also, I learned that “lynchpin” is an acceptable spelling. I thought it could only be “linchpin.”
Kyle Tippens
4:49 pm, 11.08.17
One more thing — I wondered if there were any prerequisites for the course? That is not an issue if there were (since this is part of the “University Requirements” part of the catalog), but I just wondered about that.
Karen Witemeyer
4:51 pm, 11.08.17
There are no prerequisites for ART 325.
Eric Gumm
4:59 pm, 11.08.17
Thanks for the great comments about the proposal – and for sharing the things you have learned in the process of reviewing this proposal as well! Let me address a couple of items I see in the comments so far:
1. To Kyle’s question regarding prerequisites – there are no prerequisites for this course which puts it in line with one of the necessary criteria for items in the general education menus.
2. I agree with Kyle that we need to be consistent and follow our stated expectations with regard to providing the information needed in sections B AND C of the Criteria for adding a course to the Historical Literacy menu. We have been rather lax in capturing the information from section C previously which can present a challenge when our SACSCOC accreditation team asks for the evidence to show that we are doing the assessment we indicate that we are. In that context, I would advocate for tabling this proposal to provide time for Dan and Mike to pull together those additional pieces and then we can add this back on to an agenda in the spring semester. Since this is a fall only course that provides plenty of time.
Item 2 above in no way reflects a negative impression of the course itself and, in fact, I too believe that this looks like an excellent course.
Dan McGregor
5:27 pm, 11.08.17
Per Kyle’s comment:
I’d like to add that my models for this proposal were indeed THEA 490 and HIST 280. I was given these as examples of approved courses, and attempted to set up my documentation in a similar way to THEA 490’s (it seeming to be the most content-similar of the approved examples).
Moreover, the prompt I was originally given in the spring for my proposal only consisted of section B of the UGEC Criteria for the Historical Literacy Menu. In fact, the first time I laid eyes on that full document was today, and I had to fish around for it–though this is probably some sort of negligence on my part from this spring, when I was filling this out in Germany.
Now that I’ve seen the full document, I frankly find the wording of section C of that document (particularly “Overall Student Learning Outcome 2”) to be rather impenetrable, and would request either clarification of what is wanted from me for this section (beyond the assessment components already included in my proposal), or a reprieve from this component.
Dan McGregor
10:51 am, 11.09.17
Hi, All-
In the absence of knowing exactly what’s wanted for section C, here’s a chart adaptation of some of the materials in the document. Would this suffice for the assessment piece?
Thanks,
Dan
Course Name and Number: ART 325 – Christian Art History
University Requirement Menu: Historical Literacy
Gen Ed Competency: #2 Deep understanding of and hands-on experience with the inquiry practices of disciplines that explore the natural, socio-cultural, aesthetic, and religious (or theological or spiritual) realms – achieved and demonstrated through studies that build conceptual knowledge by engaging learners in concepts and modes of inquiry that are basic to the natural sciences, social sciences, humanities, arts, and Christian faith (or theology).
Assessment Method #1: Quiz and Exam questions (objective and short answer) that ask students to identify the historical and theological contexts that drove the emergence of major themes of Christian art.
Acceptable Goal: 70% of the students answer the objective questions correctly or receive full credit on short-answer responses.
Ideal Goal: 95% of the students answer the objective questions correctly or receive full credit on short-answer responses.
Assessment Method #2: Students present a research project on a given saint, analyzing primary sources and visual symbols used to represent the saint.
Acceptable Goal: 70% of the students make a B or better on their project.
Ideal Goal: 95% of the students make a B or better on their project.
University Requirement Menu: Historical Literacy
Gen Ed Competency: #4 Social Issues: Recognize social issues when issues are presented in complex contexts.
Assessment Method: Quiz and Exam questions (objective and short answer) that ask students to identify the historical and theological contexts that drove the emergence of major themes of Christian art.
Acceptable Goal: 70% of the students answer the objective questions correctly or receive full credit on short-answer responses.
Ideal Goal: 95% of the students answer the objective questions correctly or receive full credit on short-answer responses.
Eric Gumm
5:36 pm, 11.09.17
This is exactly the type of additional information we needed, Dan. Thanks so much for pulling it together and providing it for the Council.
Kenneth Pybus
3:40 pm, 11.09.17
Motion: With the addition of Dan’s information, which I believe satisfies the requirements, I move to approve ART 325 to be added to the Historical Literacy menu.
Monty Lynn
3:42 pm, 11.09.17
I second Kenneth’s motion.
Kyle Tippens
4:08 pm, 11.09.17
I’m in favor of approving this also.
Kenneth Pybus
11:47 am, 11.10.17
Approve
Monty Lynn
11:56 am, 11.10.17
Approve.
David Kneip
12:11 pm, 11.10.17
Approve.
Greg Brooks
3:19 pm, 11.10.17
Approve
Karen Hendrick
1:57 pm, 11.14.17
I approve this proposal with the additional information provided by Dan and
Eric. Thanks. Karen Hendrick
Leslie Boiles
12:04 pm, 11.16.17
Approve
Doug Mendenhall
12:24 pm, 11.16.17
Approve
Eric Gumm
5:10 pm, 11.16.17
Thanks to everyone for participating in the discussion and voting. We have now received enough voted approving the proposal for ART 325 to be added to the Historical Literacy menu so we will consider it approved and move it forward for the consideration of the UUAC.
Stephanie Talley
9:22 pm, 11.16.17
Approve.
Brad Rix
8:00 am, 11.21.17
Approve