Saint Mary's College General Education

The Committee met in the parlor of Holy Cross Hall with faculty from History, Nursing, Political Science, and Psychology. The three different models for SMC General Education (2.0) were discussed. A summary of that conversation appears below. Afterwards, the Committee met among itself to discuss a format for the final general education lunch of the semester on April 23rd. We decided that we would construct a web-based survey to insure maximum faculty participation. What we will do at the general education lunch is to solicit our colleagues' input on what they think the questions should be. We also talked about our timeline. Because course selection for the fall semester of 2008 will begin in February of next year, it will be almost impossible to have a complete program ready to go by that time. It makes more sense, therefore, to think of 2007-2008 as the year to arrive at a final model with 2008-2009 the year to do the preparation for implementation in 2009-2010.

---

Faculty were asked to comment on the structures of the three models, noting areas of strengths and weaknesses as they saw them.

One faculty member began by asking for more details in the models, saying that it was difficult to adequately evaluate them in their present form. She expressed disappointment that an introduction to Women's Studies wasn't required, for example. Another faculty said that something like a requirement in Women's Studies is in Model A. A member of the committee noted that Women's Studies courses could comprise an interdisciplinary minor in Model B.

A faculty member then noted that on Model B there is only one Religious Studies course required. He stated that as a member of a college with a religious identity and heritage, he would not want to see the Religious Studies requirement reduced to only one course.

Interdisciplinarity was regarded as a positive of all three models, although each could use further development of this element. Someone then asked the committee what we mean by interdisciplinary. A committee member said that anything that gets faculty speaking more to each other should be regarded as beneficial. That's part of the rationale behind Model B's interdisciplinary minors. What we can offer is limited only by our imagination. What about study abroad in relation to the sophomore year interdisciplinary minor? The answer was that study abroad may already be considered an interdisciplinary minor (for example, Irish Studies for those going to Maynooth). This also helps out staffing on the home campus, since we wouldn't have to host interdisciplinary minors for every member of every class. The question then arose whether students could propose their own interdisciplinary minors. Yes, this would be the best outcome, since it would require students to take more ownership for their own program of studies. For example, suppose a student wanted to do something on death and dying and found courses in Philosophy, Social Work, Nursing, and Religious Studies. It was noted that gerontology is a needed area at the College.

A faculty member commented that Model B's orientation about communicative, investigative, and integrative skills allows her to conceive of our requirements in a more scholarly way. Model A's "self, dialogue, and action" sounds more like a policy course. Model B's setup seems more comprehensive.

Another faculty member then brought up that research shows that community learning helps retention and depth of thinking. Both tandems and first-year experiences are versions of community learning.

A member of the Nursing Department asked how without additional staffing Nursing could be a part of general education. Currently, the only courses taught by Nursing faculty that are open to non-majors are taught as an overload. A committee member noted that while all of the models are trying to find ways to give professional programs a greater role in general education than they previously have, the committee by itself cannot resolve the staffing matters that may be involved in these structural changes. Another faculty member said that one way to sidestep some of the staffing worries is to not think of one person teaching one group of students for an entire semester, but to have various modules rotating in and out so that one faculty member could serve many more students than the typical class size. Perhaps the best way to proceed is to come up with a structure that doesn't require a particular department to contribute to general education but does allow it. Support was expressed for involving the professional programs in general education, but scepticism was voiced about the prospect of allowing their involvement with the hope that staffing would permit it down the road. Unless this were built into the program from the beginning, it probably wouldn't happen. A committee member stated that if the College adopts a commitment to one of these models, it is also committing to do what needs to be done to support its implementation. Another committee member then asked the Nursing faculty what kinds of contributions to general education they could foresee for their department if staffing were not an issue. Several responded that they envisioned courses on gerontology, suicidology, women's health, health policy, and genetics. So there was an array of 4-6 courses that could be offered. It was noted by a faculty from another department that the women's health course is extremely popular with our students and if more resources were made available to allow a larger clientele to be served by this class, they would certainly be used.

The topic then turned to Model A's description of 'locating the self.' One faculty member asked whether we should foster broader focus than a concentration on the self. That is, should we allow students the option of defining themselves only in a fairly narrow, homogenous community that is Saint Mary's? Perhaps, another mentioned, this facet of their education comes when Model A speaks about responsible action in the world. But at what point should this broader understanding come in? Perhaps History could help open up our students to more global concerns? A committee member said that it bears saying that all of these models try to direct the students outwards. But all do this in intercultural, interdisciplinary ways rather than international ways. Should an international focus be more readily apparent? A faculty member said that such is necessary for the world in which we live. Another said that many of our students are woefully ignorant of the world today and that we need to take them out of their local experience into a wider world experience. The question was then asked whether emphasizing the intercultural would do exactly that. But a committee member said that there may indeed be a difference between intercultural and international. For example, study abroad is obviously international, but it may not be intercultural because students may end up associating largely just with their own group while abroad. A Nursing professor noted that in clinical settings, her students are exposed to a great deal of intercultural exchange but very little truly international dialogue. So in that sense, the two can be very different. Another faculty member noted that unless we are intentional and use language emphasizing exposure to global issues, students will miss out on an important aspect of their education. The example of the Viet Nam was then brought forward to illustrate the dangers of ignorance of history and international affairs. Also, more Americans buy Japanese products than Japanese buy American products because the Japanese took the time to understand our culture and needs. If you want to be successful today, you must understand other cultures and other tastes. Something more than intercultural courses is necessary for this. Required world civilization courses might be one useful way to address this component of our students' educations.

The conversation moved to the 'self, dialogue, action' schema of Model A and Model C. She said that this language didn't speak to her. She thought 'self' too individualistic, especially in a time in which many of our students are already too self-consumed. Finding the self is an acceptable idea, but we find the self by studying and encountering others. The idea that the self is a permanent reality impermeable to outside influence is an Enlightenment concept that many today have gone beyond. 'Identity' is a more useful term than 'self,' because the former acknowledges that change is endemic to who we are. The individualistic concerns are then heightened by the idea of dialogue, which seems too one-on-one. In this regard, Model C's highlighting of systems is a useful corrective. Yet, it doesn't explicitly involve disciplines like sociology, women's studies, etc., as it's speaking of systems.

A question was then asked whether the junior-senior seminar in Model C would take the place of the capstone in a student's major. The answer was that it wouldn't.

Emphasizing skills is better than emphasizing knowledge. We need to teach students how to learn. We are simply unable to teach them everything they need to know. And even if we could, most of this knowledge would soon be outdated because the world is changing so rapidly. It's more important to focus on skills and give students a way to navigate their world.

How much freedom do these models allow? For example, Nursing students have space for only a very few electives. This led to a discussion on whether we are considering a truly common general education curriculum for all students. This is currently an open question, but there is presently a disparity across degrees for what is required to fulfill general education. Even if we don't have a core, maybe we should have something like a spine. Another open question is whether we should be trying to reduce the number of general education requirements, thereby making the 'footprint' of general education smaller? Or should we be trying to expand the coverage of required areas (viz., the previous discussion of some kind of international requirement). Model C has 42 hours + 8 hours for language. Model B doesn't really work in credit hours, but in courses (with occasional supplementary experiences). A concern was then expressed that students and their parents tend to expect more and more; and they expect all of these things to fit within four years. At larger state institutions, it's often thought no big deal if students have to take additional courses beyond their fourth year. This led to a conversation about double majoring. One faculty member said that she believes students are motivated to double- (or triple-) major because they do not know what skills they need to get a job or what skills they acquire at Saint Mary's. Being able to list more things on a transcript is thought to be a way to hedge their bets. Therefore, said a committee member, if we explain general education better and articulate what it is and what students are supposed to get out of these classes, it could reduce the numbers of double majors. But not only this—students themselves need to be able to explain their general education requirement.
At the same time, we need to respect the diversity of our students. We really don’t' want every student coming out of Saint Mary's looking exactly like every other student. We can celebrate a difference of skill vectors.

A faculty member from Psychology then asked about the portrayal of her discipline in these three models. She pointed out how Psychology is depicted differently depending on the model as, for example, related to the self in one while grouped with nursing and social work in another. Psychology should be with the systems. A committee member responded that there's no reason why one discipline couldn't land in several different categories depending on who the instructor was and what her or his emphases were in teaching that subject. That's why a general education committee will be needed to manage the program, and that committee would definitely need to consult with instructors so that individual courses are properly categorized.

At the end of the session, the faculty in attendance thanked the committee for its work in bringing the discussion along over the course of this year.

---

Any comments on the models or on any of the other issues discussed above can be posted below by anyone from the community.