Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Professor Staples at 8:35 a.m.
Agenda:
I. Approval of 2/9/05 minutes
II. Announcements
II. Discussion of Experiential Learning Proposal
Proceedings:
I. The minutes of the 2/9/05 meeting were approved, with a minor correction; that is, Professor Staples, not Professor Sievers, was to make corrections to the 12/6/04 minutes. This has been done.
II. Student Rep. Pellegrino reported that the junior class representative
appointed to APPC by collegiate can't make it to our
meetings, due to a schedule conflict. Therefore, another junior class
representative will be appointed, and Ms. Pellegrino will check with the
person appointed as sophomore class representative to see whether she can
make it to our Thursday 12:30 p.m. meetings.
III. Nancy Karpinski distributed a draft of a revised proposal for experiential
learning, which was created by herself and Dean
Denard, in consultation with Professor Staples. The draft attempts
to address the following concerns raised by the faculty at the 2/8/05 meeting:
1) A definition of experiential learning is needed.
2) How will the proposal affect faculty workload?
3) What, exactly, will meet the requirement? Will faculty have any
say in determining this? For example, will a student be allowed to use
senior thesis research to fulfill the requirement?
After passing out the draft of the revised proposal, Director Karpinski reported some statistics she and Ann Mathieson compiled on this year's graduation class:
Of the 94 students, only 4 of them have done nothing that would satisfy the experiential learning requirement as proposed.
Of the 38 transfer students in the graduating class, 19 would have
met the proposed requirement, while 19 would not have.
Of the 56 regular students, 37 would have met the proposed requirement, while 19 would not have.
At this point, Professor Penniman opined that the faculty's concern is not whether students can fulfill the requirement; their concern is faculty workload. He feels this concern is what inclined the faculty to wish to include things such as senior thesis research under the rubric of what would satisfy the experiential learning requirement.
Professor Staples noted that any increase in faculty workload in the next fews years will be due to an increase in students overall, and not due to implementation of an experiential learning requirement. In fact, this proposed requirement helps to spread out the work somewhat, insofar as it would replace the current J-term requirement.
Professor Uddin asked for clarification regarding the role of the faculty in determining what counts as experiential learning. Professor Staples pointed out that faculty have always had the final say in determining this where internships are concerned; this would not change under the experiential learning proposal.
Dean Hall asked APPC if we felt an open meeting about this might be useful. Possible dates would be Tuesday, February 22 or Tuesday, March 1. No decision was made about this.
In closing, Professor Staples asked Director Karpinski and Dean Denard to "clean up" the proposal, paying special attention to number 3 on page 4. The issue there: It would be tricky to prohibit something that would otherwise count as experiential (say, an internship) solely on the basis of its having been sponsored by a Wells faculty member.
Adjournment: Prof. Staples adjourned the meeting at 9:30 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted: Karla Leybold-Taylor, Secretary Pro Tem