[In these minutes: Public Engagement, TA preparation, Resolution on
Admissions’ Applications Requirements, March 1 Student Senate agenda
items]
STUDENT SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE (SSCC)
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 8, 2007
[These minutes reflect
discussion and debate at a committee of the University of Minnesota Senate; none
of the comments, conclusions, or actions reported in these minutes represent the
views of, nor are they binding on, the Senate the Administration, or the Board
of Regents.]
PRESENT: Daniel Moore (chair), Kristen Denzer, Jeff
Holtz, Bree Richards, Trent Senenfelder.
ABSENT: John Faustgen,
Jeni Kiewatt, James Skoog.
1. DISCUSSION WITH ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT
VICTOR BLOOMFIELD
Daniel Moore welcomed Victor Bloomfield, Associate
Vice President for Public Engagement, to the meeting, noting that today’s
discussion was about the role of public engagement in the classroom and if or
how students can make a push for this effort.
Associate Vice President
Bloomfield said that much of the focus of public engagement has been on research
efforts instead of its integration into teaching. He distributed a few handouts
that described his office and define service learning, as well as a list of
courses that incorporate public engagement and survey results from those
courses.
He said that the University is focusing more on student learning
outcomes, of which service learning is a part. Classes with this component
engage materials in a real-world context and do not filter all information
through books or lectures. It allows students to validate what they are
learning in an active way.
Q: Why is participation in service learning
not included as one of the new student learning outcomes?
A: The office
feels that it is better to incorporate service learning in each student learning
outcome rather than making it a separate statement. There is also a question of
the number of students that can be engaged at any one time in service learning.
If it was required, there would be a greater need for outside agencies, which
would not allow much room for agencies to work with other
institutions.
Q: If there is a limit to how many students can
participate, how can your office determine which students qualify?
A:
There is no limit at that point.
Q: Has planning for other courses been
done?
A: New course development has been left up to instructors and
departments who want to do it.
Q: What is the financial impact of service
learning courses?
A: The biggest cost to implement new course is
instructor time to develop the course.
Q: Is there value in requesting
departments to offer more courses?
A: Yes since it provides students
educational value and fits with the University’s civic mission.
Q:
Could the Career and Community Learning Center (CCLC) offer all service learning
courses?
A: No since they do not have the resources.
Q: Is there a
comparable program at another Big Ten institution to use as a model?
A:
Laurel Hirt, who leads CCLC, is a national leader in this area. While the
University does not enroll the largest number of students, its program is at the
highest quality. From last year, CCLC surveyed 63 courses offered by 49
instructors and enrolling 2000 students. The University also offers a Community
Engagement Scholar’s Program. It is a demanding requirement to receive
this transcript notation.
Members suggested that service learning courses
be identified as such in the course catalog and that they need to satisfy
minimum criteria to earn this identification.
Q: Does the Office for
Public Engagement (OPE) work with the coordinate campuses?
A: OPE is a
system-wide office. It works more with Duluth that the other campuses since
this campus has a civic engagement under the Vice Chancellor. Morris has a
well-established public engagement area, the Center for Small Towns. OPE is
working on a closer relationship with Crookston.
Q: Are public engagement
courses offered for graduate and professional students?
A: These courses
are offered a school-by-school basis, but most professional schools do a better
job than graduate courses.
Q: Are OPE resources available to student
organizations?
A: There is a group, Student Committee on Public
Engagement (SCOPE), which receives help from OPE on its activities.
2.
CAMPUS, STUDENT ASSOCIATION, AND OTHER GOVERNANCE GROUP
UPDATES
Members provided the following updates:
- Trent Senenfelder reported that CSA will be having a retreat this
weekend.
- Jeff Holtz said that MSA is planning for a March 28 Lobby Day and he is
hoping for strong coordinate campus support
- Dan Moore reported that Morris is interviewing for the new SSCC member
- Kristen Denzer said that GAPSA is working to promote an all-campus
Presidential election and a new Vice President for Public Affairs was recently
elected
3. DISCUSSION OF STUDENTS FOR TWO SEARCH
COMMITTEES
SSCC discussed candidates for the two positions and
forwarded ranked lists to Senior Vice President Jones.
4. DISCUSSION
OF INFORMATION RECEIVED ON TA PREPARATION
Daniel Moore referred to
answers that had been received to questions generated by SSCC at its last
meeting. He asked members how they wished to proceed.
A member said that
eight hours of preparation was required by his department and that any more was
considered optional. TAs are also not fired if they do not attend the required
preparation. The current system has no centralized, strict standards.
Q:
Does SSCC know that this is a problem?
A: TA preparation is the number
one complaint received by the CLA Student Board. While some are great, others
are not since there is no pedagogical preparation in most cases.
It was
decided that a resolution would be drafted for approval by the Student Senate on
March 1 that would ask the Educational Policy Committee to look into this
issue.
5. DISCUSSION OF RESOLUTION ON ADMISSIONS’ APPLICATIONS
REQUIREMENTS
Mac Fadlallah, Law School student and Student Senator,
joined the meeting to present a resolution on admissions’ applications
requirements that he would like added to the March 1 Student Senate agenda. The
resolution asks that the race and ethnicity section on all University
applications be changed to represent ethno-geographic areas. The main problems
with current sections is that the terms used are not inclusive, there is no
uniformity between applications, and some of the terms used are very
general.
He said that the resolution asks for a minimum set of offerings
be included on all applications, but that schools can still augment those
choices with more specific classifications. The resolution also lets students
check all boxes that apply instead of making them just choose one.
He
stated that one change from the original proposal is the ‘other’
box. He has learned that this will create a problem for PeopleSoft, so
recommends that this box be made optional.
If approved by the Student
Senate on March 1, he would like to bring it to the University Senate on April
5.
Q: Will allowing applicants to check more than one box throw off
tracking numbers?
A: No since some schools already allow this option.
The resolution would just have all schools allow this option. The tracking
numbers are not off since the schools still determine how to classify
applicants.
6. OTHER BUSINESS
The committee then discussed
the current issues with Wisconsin reciprocity and suggested bringing a
resolution to the March 1 Student Senate meeting. It was decided that this
resolution, along with ones on admissions’ applications requirements and
TA preparation would be the action items on the March 1 Student Senate
meeting.
With no further business, Daniel Moore thanked all members for
attending and adjourned the meeting.
Becky Hippert
University
Senate