In June of 2019, the General Education Revision Task Force, with a revised membership, continued working on a new General Education Plan for UNC Greensboro students. The Task Force began with the Resolution passed by Faculty Senate in May 2019, which endorsed 5 competencies (written communication, oral communication, information literacy, quantitative reasoning, and critical thinking) and presented 5 recommendations, including evaluation of the framework and addition of 3 other competencies. With so many pieces to address in a short time frame, we broke up the work into subcommittees, each tasked with addressing a recommendation or further development of the proposal. Beyond the Task Force membership, we have engaged faculty with expertise in the endorsed and proposed competencies to develop the definitions and outcomes for each, so that faculty on the Senate and faculty, staff, and students across campus can conduct a deeper assessment of the proposed components. We are bringing the pieces together into a meaningful whole. We will present an edited Gen Ed plan to the Faculty Senate in September 2019.
Draft Plan, Upcoming Forum, and Survey
- Monday, August 26 – The draft plan will be posted on this page.
- Wednesday, August 28 from 3-5pm – Open Forum in the EUC Auditorium
- Wednesday, August 28 – A survey will be posted on this page for written feedback.
General Education Revision Task Force Membership:
- Co-Chair, Amy Harris Houk, Associate Professor/Head, Research, Outreach, and Instruction Department, University Libraries, a_harri2@uncg.edu
- Co-Chair, Jodi Pettazzoni, Associate Vice Provost and Director, Office of Assessment, Accreditation, and Academic Program Planning, jepettaz@uncg.edu
- Chuck Bolton, Associate Dean, Professor of History, ccbolton@uncg.edu
- Angela Bolte, Assistant Dean, Lloyd International Honors College, akbolte@uncg.edu
- Frances Bottenberg, Lecturer, Philosophy, f_botten@uncg.edu
- Joi Bulls, Associate Professor and Director of HDFS Internship Program, Human Development and Family Studies, jwbulls@uncg.edu
- David Carlone, Associate Professor, Communication Studies, dacarlon@uncg.edu
- Kay Cowen, Professor, School of Nursing, kjcowen@uncg.edu
- Jenny Dale, Reference Librarian and First Year Instruction Coordinator, jedale2@uncg.edu
- Ye (Jane) He, Associate Professor, Teacher Education and Higher Education, y_he@uncg.edu
- Lisa Henline, Associate University Registrar, lmhenlin@uncg.edu
- Constance McKoy, Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies in Music, School of Music, clmckoy@uncg.edu
- Larry Taube, Associate Professor, Undergraduate Programs Director, ISSCM, lrtaube@uncg.edu
- Dana Saunders, Director, Students First Office, Division of Enrollment Management, dfsaunde@uncg.edu
- Jennifer Stephens, Associate Director, UTLC, Jennifer.stephens@uncg.edu
Administrative Support
Lynn Wyrick, Office of Assessment, Accreditation, and Academic Program Planning, plwyrick@uncg.edu
Background on the Process
In spring 2017, the UNCG Faculty Senate and the UNCG General Education Council approved a call for a task force of UNCG faculty to conduct a self-study of the UNCG General Education Program. The last study of the UNCG General Education Program was conducted in the 2005-2006 academic year. That study produced the framework for the current General Education Program at UNCG, building on the AULER system that was in place earlier. Part of that framework included the creation of the General Education Council, which has since overseen the establishment of new General Education courses, the recertification of existing General Education courses, and the assessment of the General Education Program. Since that last study, the undergraduate student body at UNCG has grown more diverse, and UNCG is now a Minority-Serving Institution. There has also been substantial overall growth in the UNCG student body, including increasing numbers of transfer students. In addition, over the last decade, there have been significant changes in the national expectations concerning the conceptualization and delivery of General Education as part of a University education. For the complete charge from the UNCG Faculty Senate and the UNCG General Education Council, see Appendix A of the report.
The task force created to conduct this self-study was composed of nine UNCG faculty, with voting representatives from all the academic units on campus, a non-voting faculty chair, and non-voting members from various non-academic units on campus.
FAQs
Please see the document linked here.
Based on the Self-Study carried out in 2017-18, the complexity of the program is the primary issue of concern. This issue includes the difficulty of pinning down exactly how many credit hours the program requires to complete and the degree to which students can easily grasp the objectives of the program. Our second important area of concern involves determining whether and how the program could help students build meaningful connections across their Gen Ed coursework. A third issue was to consider how the curriculum currently meets the needs of our students and the mission/strategic direction for the university.
The current Marker system causes undue complexity and opaqueness for the program and its users. Marker courses, although required, do not necessarily contribute credit toward the General Education total unless the Marker course is also a Category course. Many Marker courses exist separate from the Category course system. It is therefore difficult to know how many credits are actually taken by students beyond the stated total for Gen Ed. The proposed program aims to establish a clear number of required hours for Gen Ed and to also preserve the enrichment intended by the Marker system without the difficulty in understanding the requirements.
A focus on Diversity and on Health/Wellness was suggested or endorsed by a robust cross-section of stakeholders whose survey responses or forum remarks contributed to the Self-Study Report in 2017-18. They were further supported during the campus conversations of Fall Semester, 2018. They also directly tie into the University’s mission statement and the Chancellor’s vision.
Assessment is currently based on the Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) associated with the course Categories. In the proposed program, SLOs would be associated with the Competencies. Because there would be fewer Competencies than there are now Categories, the assessment process would be streamlined.
In the proposed program, a General Education course that is required for the major will also count toward the appropriate Gen Ed requirement. However, a department or unit may not require a specific course to satisfy a Gen Ed requirement.
Yes, having a few transitional years in which the old and new programs coexist via grandfathering clauses is common practice. Students generally follow the program that corresponds to their year of admission to the university.
The Task Force has not made a recommendation on this question, though it seems reasonable to continue a policy that allows new college students to take any course labeled Gen Ed.
Courses will need to be recertified for the new Gen Ed program. However, it stands to reason that many currently certified Gen Ed courses would remain so, pending appropriate updates or alterations.
We must accept General Education programs completed at NC Community Colleges, as outlined in the Comprehensive Articulation Agreement. With this in mind, the requirements of the proposed program are expected to correlate well with Community College programs. The Thematic Seminar course may be designed to include special sections for transfer students.
The Self-Study report made several recommendations on this point, which Provost Dunn voiced support for. The details of any administrative restructuring will wait until the proposed program has been accepted. The Provost’s Office has recently initiated a search for a new Associate Vice Provost for Student Success / Dean of Undergraduate Studies, who will be involved in the overseeing the transition.
While this Task Force can consider overall credit hours to be assigned to General Education, how departments would fare under the different models is not part of its charge.