Use this page to display discussion points. (Margie Lagleder)

Mike Kozak - There are 3 categories to be reduced to 2.  I believe we need to be fair to all three. Therefore, looking at the bottom 3 categores of over-arching objectives for the UNT Core Curriculum, and understanding that we will have two separate categories, I suggest the following 4 over-arching objectives to required for each of the two categores - as a minimum.

Category I ( Name??)

1. They will engage with a variety of others in thoughtful and well crafted communication.

2. They will broaden and refine their thinking as a part of the give and take of ideas, seeking to better understand other's perspectives as well as their own.

3. They will learn decision making strategies that include an ethical analysis.

4. They will gain leadership skills that prepare them for active citizenship.

Category II (Name??)

1. They will be able to express ways that exposure to different ideas, perspectives, cultures and viewpoints have enriched their thinking.

2. They will be able to articulate the values that undergrid their lives, the UNT community and the larger society.

3. They will cultivate self-awareness, balance and an openness to change.

4. They will deepen their understanding of the variety of human experience and gain the capacity to see situations from another's viewpoint.

Most courses currently in the three existing categores could probably fit into either Category I or II.

William Cherry (Mathematics): The consensus of the majority of the people who attended the forum on November 5 was to not be constrained by thinking of this task as finding a way to incorporate the three former core areas into two areas, so I will not focus my comments on how to do that.  If the consensus becomes that we should try to get as close as possible to our old core, then as I said at the forum, I think the easiest and best way to do that is to have two core areas: communication and wellness, and to require cross-cultural diversity by a different mechanism, such as the "course flag" mechanism recently adopted at UT Austin -- I explain this in more detail below and link to Austin's requirements.  I will not propose a specific alternative, but make a few comments.

Issues of Pragmatism and Efficiency: Many degree programs in the College of Arts & Sciences require foreign language proficiency.  Many degree programs in the College of Engineering require technical writing.  From a purely practical point of view, it would be helpful if at least one of the institutional option categories of the university core were such that a foreign language or technical writing course would naturally expect to fit in there.  That way students in those colleges would be able to count one class toward the college foreign language or technical writing requirement and also toward the university core.  In fact, from a purely pragmatic point of view, the current interim "Understanding the Human Community" core works quite well for these students because two semesters of foreign language can be applied toward the core under the current scheme.  My opposition to a "first year experience" core requirement is also based on pragmatism.  Many science and engineering students who come in already have a full plate of courses they need to enroll in during their first year in order to meet the prerequisites for their next set of classes and including other classes that should be done in first year such as freshmen composition and starting in foreign language for those who need two years of foreign language.  On top of that, so many of our students are transfer students that it does not seem appropriate to have them go back and do a course intended for a new college student.  I think we should look to other mechanisms than the core for creating common early experiences.  One possible place to do this is in courses already in the core such as freshmen composition and the government courses that are typically taken during freshmen year.

A capstone experience: Although not greeted with great enthusiasm at the core forum, some mathematics students have reacted positively to the idea of a capstone experience as part of the core.  In mathematics we currently have a capstone experience for our students pursuing teaching certification, but generally not for other students.  Some students not in the teacher certification program have expressed sentiments along the lines that they wish there was a capstone offering that would attempt to unify and make connections among the knowledge they acquire across the degree program.  We would have to work to add (a) capstone course(s) for non-certification students to our course inventory, but it could be a good thing for the students if the university core coerced (or encouraged) us to create these courses and develop resources to teach them.  Having a capstone experience requirement might also open up some more research experience opportunities for our students.  Faculty I have talked with in several departments have expressed reservations about requiring a capstone experience of every student, but it seems to be something to which students have reacted positively. The resource problem is non-trivial in our current under-staffed circumstance, and to what extent we could develop a good capstone experience for all our students is unclear.

Foreign language: In addition to the practical concerns about having foreign language courses have a place in the core discussed above, I personally think it is also important to have the core encourage, or at least not discourage, students from taking foreign language courses.  I think this fits well with UNT's strategic goal of "internationalization," and I think that many things that students have an opportunity to learn while a university student they can also learn on their own later in life if they have an interest.  Foreign language is something that these days can be more easily learned on one's own than in the past, but nonetheless, learning a foreign language in a formal classroom setting tends to be much more effective than self-study, and proficiency in a foreign language is a useful skill.

Cross-cultural diversity and UT Austin's Course Flag system: I liked the diversity requirement in the old core, but I would like to see us accomplish this goal without requiring an additional course.  I would suggest that we try to implement something like UT Austin's new "course flag" scheme to require that a student take a course that focusses on diversity but that at the same time meets some other component of the core, thereby meeting two goals with one course.  Austin's scheme is described in their cataloghttp://registrar.utexas.edu/catalogs/ug08-10/ch02/ug08.ch02.html#core-curriculum and reads as follows:

Skills and Experiences Flags

In the process of fulfilling the core curriculum and other degree requirements, all undergraduates are expected to complete courses with content in the following six areas:

• Writing: three courses beyond Rhetoric and Writing 306 or its equivalent
• Quantitative reasoning: one course
• Global cultures: one course
• Cultural diversity in the United States: one course
• Ethics and leadership: one course
• Independent inquiry: one course

Courses with sufficient content in these areas will be identified in the Course Schedule by the appropriate flags. The School of Undergraduate Studies monitors flagged courses to ensure that they meet the guidelines set by the General Faculty.

Each college or school implements these requirements in its own way. Students should consult their advisers and the degree requirements listed in chapters 3 through 16 of this catalog. Most degree programs have not fully implemented the flag requirements for students following the 2008–2010 catalog.

I am not suggesting we adopt all of Austin's flags, but I think some sort of cultural diversity "flag" is worthy of consideration. Note that Austin's flag scheme is not part of the university core, so it is up to each individual college within the university to enforce the flag scheme in the college level degree requirements.  It seems to me that UNT could develop a university policy of one or more course flags and adopt a similar policy that college's are expected to incorporate the flag requirements into their college-level degree requirements.

In summary: If it were entirely up to me, my first preference would be to make permanent the current "Understanding the Human Community" scheme and to add a "diversity" flag requirement using a scheme similar to Austin's.  My second preference, or perhaps even my first preference given sufficient faculty resources, would be to have one core area either be communication or something broader but that would still encompass foreign language and the second core area be a capstone experience, again adopting an Austin style diversity flag requirement. I don't have a strong view on whether the diversity flag should be a university wide requirement, but if diversity is permanently dropped from the university core, I'd like to see Arts & Sciences pick up a diversity flag requirement.