June 26, 2012
|Members Present||Ex-Officio Present||Guests Present|
|Ruth Beattie||Bill Rayens||Leah Simpson|
|Heather Bush||Mike Shanks||Chris Thuringer|
1. Discussion of the UK Core and UK’s 2+2 Program . Discussion started in the meeting with Undergraduate Council just prior to this meeting. Many points were made in the GEOC meeting. The Committee agreed to draft a formal policy response for the next meeting later in the summer. It was anticipated that this policy would have a definite expiration date that would allow the University to alter agreements as necessary based on empirical evidence of success that would be gathered in the interim.
The Committee wanted to go on record as saying they wanted to make sure the Core is respected above all. GEOC felt it was very important to avoid the word “blanket” and to avoid so-called “blanket” agreements. The group felt strongly that articulation agreements should be both institution specific and area specific within that institution, and all such agreements should involve the appropriate faculty and departments at U.K. GEOC recognized that this was more labor intense up front but felt it would produce a better set of agreements that were better for all, especially the students who were participating.
Finally, GEOC was very supportive of the 2+2 programs and wanted that conveyed as well. They just want to do this in a manner that reflects a deep concern for the quality of undergraduate education at UK. This is a concern for the international student as well as a concern for upholding the university’s educational standards for ALL students equitably.
2. Discussion of how GEOC should be organized and managed going forward this fall. Dr. Bill Rayens had a two-year appointment with Undergraduate Education to facilitate the work of the Committee and that appointment ended officially on May 15th 2012. Dr. Beattie was open to the idea of serving as Chair in a new structure, but deferred accepting until she could talk with Rayens about workload.
3. Process and plan to make any necessary changes to the six rubrics used in the Spring 2012 Assessment Institute. GEOC agreed to complete this task by the end of the summer. Leah Simpson and Chris Thuringer will facilitate this process by sending out reviewer comments from the Spring 2012 Institute. Dr. Withers noted that it was critical that the Inquiry Area Experts get together to work on their four rubrics in concert.
4. Begin to frame the nature of the feedback loop from Assessment to faculty. Following a general presentation by Assistant Provost Chris Thuringer, GEOC agreed to address this in their second summer meeting.
5. Discussion of vetting order. GEOC felt strongly that the vetting order that had been used during the first two years was the right order (GEOC then Undergraduate Council) and Rayens was instructed to take that message to the Senate Council retreat the following day.