Minutes: September 22, 2016

Attendees:  S. McDonough, Bambi Chapin, Amanda Knapp, Cindy Hody, Sandra Lindsay, Terry Worcheski, Jeff Martens, Steve Bradley, Beth Beezer, Evan Leiter-Mason

I. Moving forward

S. McDonough asked the for recommondations from the committee as far as the meeting schedule for the Spring Semester. S. McDonough has proposed that the meeting schedule be revisited to include the bulk of the meetings a month after the semester starts and start the semester with bi-weekly meetings to meet the campus needs.

II. Shady Grove relationship with UMBC – Chris Steele

Chris Steele provided information points about the Shady Grove undergraduate programs:

History – 38 Students

Political Science – 39 students

Social Work – 150 students

Psychology – 152 students

10 FTE Faculty

5 Staff

73.4% Female

10.7 average credit load per student

27 mean age across the program

27.7% White

32.6% Hispanic/ Latino

23% Black

6% Asian

As of Fall of 2016:

54 sections

29 of 54 are FT faculty

1 taught by FT Academic Staff

24 Adjuncts

Questions posed to C. Steele:

  • How are the two locations intended to react with one another?

Department shares are serious and thoughtful about how Shady Grove interacts with the other programs.  

  • Elective courses: A problem…

There are not enough elective courses at SG.  C. Steele would like to incentivize departments are at least recognize that costs are involved in these courses.

As much of the UMBC experience should be displayed in the undergraduate program at SG.  

Shady Grove is comprised of 100% transfer students.

New building being built and will be open in FY19.  Currently at max for space.

  • What are the limitations on students taking classes at both locations?

There isn’t a policy however, there is a “practice”.

Communication on something that is a relatively rare occurrence.  Any ideas on how we can communicate something like this would be welcome.

Shady Grove students are the only ones that can view the courses available at SG.  Main Campus can not view the courses there.  Advisors can view both.

We now have student groups where the students are grouped by sites.

Committee has expressed that the communications of a more transparent process.

III. Postings tabled

ENME489/ ENME413 – The committee asked the preparer to rephrase “contact hours” as the general feeling was that it was not used the right way in context.  How will attendance and class participation be graded (asked for clarification).  Recommended more explicitness on how they would be grading.  The pre-requisites in syllabus don’t match the Course form.  What is “graduate style homework”?

IV.  Approval of Meeting minutes from September 15, 2016

Meeting minutes were approved without change.