Core Seminar 50: COS
Preliminary Review and Initial Summary
Spring 2007
Backround
As a part of the Brooklyn Campus Review of Core Curriculum following the 1993
Middle States visit, the ~acultySenate-throughthe Brooklyn Campus Curriculum
Committee-took up the idea of rethinking several long-standing core courses (such as in
History, Philosophy and Science), and of considering the possibility of undertaking new
initiatives as part of the required Arts and Sciedces core.
Among new initiatives one in particular was identified as a "new direction"-a seminar
that would address the learning objectives of the entire core, but in ways that would be new for
the campus. BCCC appointed a Task Force, and charged it with examining outstanding
examples fiom other colleges, generating potential examples for Task Force consideration,
developinglrefiningmodels that might work in Brooklyn, identifying the timing of any such
course (i.e., when in the course sequence), and engaging in discussion of course ramifications,
administrative apparatus, support systems needed, and existing resources. A full year of Task
Force deliberation, culminating in a presentation to BCCC and their approval to move forward,
ended in Spring 2001 with a formal proposal made by the BCCC. It was included in the Spring
2001 Core Curriculum Proposal approved by the Faculty Senate. Other elements in that
Proposal included redesigns of some existing Core courses, elaboration and ratification of the
WAC initiative, and a formal agreement to require at least three Writing Intensive (WI) courses
for graduation:
English 16
Core Seminar (English 16 the pre-requisite)
Department-identified Writing Intensive Course for Majors
Core Seminar (COS) was granted a graduated calendar: it was to have one year for Planning
(2001-2002); one year for a Pilot Project (2002-2003) in which a limited number of sections
would be scheduled; then Universal Implementation (2003-2004) during which broad scheduling
would begin- donsthroughout the week, evenings and weekends, and in summer session.
The exact summary proposed was:
CORE SEMINAR: Three credits, three hours per week. This theme based,
writing intensive seminar is designed to encourage students to think critically,
reason abstractly, and engage in structured intellectual speech, writing, computer
-exercises-.It
kirdanded to prepare students
for focused study in
---7---specific disciplines. Students will become acquainted with a varrety of
approaches to learning and thinking while enjoying a common experience
provided by the common theme and a set of common readings. A crossdisciplinary approach is used to facilitate students' ability to seek relationships
between and among various areas of study.
The more detailed proposal (See Appendix 1) cites particular cognitive skill objectives
for COS, and indicates in a general way how the structureof COS moves students towards
greater facility in these specific abilities.
Central to the objectives of COS are these Cognitive Skills:
To help students strengthen their capacities for inquiry, abstract thinking, and critical
analysis (Goal 1).
The aim is to enhance students' ability to:
b. write organized, coherent discourse
c. speak organized, persuasive discourse
d. listen critically
e. research efficiently and knowledgeably
f reason abstractly
g. interpret numerical data
[passage fiom Core Curriculum Proposal Document, Spring 20011
The Planning Year focused on sorting through ways to structure COS to accomplish these
ambitious goals, amve at consensus about readings, and build on the implications of the
approved-of proposal. The Planning Committee (See Appendix 2) concluded that COS aims to
provide a miniature learning community among students who examine an overarching theme
across all sections of the course; to require a modest set of three specified readings that all
...........................
sections will discuss; to enlarge the arena of learning beyond classroom i n t d o n by
incorporating structured fieldtrips in the metropolitan area into COS and by emouraging students
to partake of cultural programs on campus; and by "pairing" instructors fiom differing
disciplines into teams of 2-4 sections, so that once a month they might meet together fbr a special
laboratory in which students can hear clearly the variant interpredationsthat derive from
disciplinary discourse of material assigned and to cement somewhat the sense of a larger
community engaged in parallel inquiry.
Although some among the planners thought COS should be in a student's first term on
campus, consellsus was to design it for upper fbshmenflower sophomores (recognizing that
many students will in fact be sophomores because of skills courses), which would permit
-------------------
registrants to complete the pre-requisite English 16 course. It was ~ ~ ~ i - d t i & ~ ~ Z ~ - - 2003-the pilot Project year-was essential to work through structural elements (such as length
of each session of the course), select readings, experiment with the Library l d n g component,
and organizing ongoing Faculty Prep Seminars for continuing development of a cadre of
colleagues ready to teach COS once the Pilot ended.
During the Pilot, &en, readings selected by pdwticipatbg f k & y were provided in Xerox
copies; courses were offered both twice weekly for 90 minute &lis
and once weeldy fix 150
minutes; Library sessions were scheduled three times per term, d d e dm meeting times, mad
d n g informal mmthgs were scheduled to get feedback h m i n s t m c h d m w people io
time to mod* plans for the 2603-2004 season. Calculations based on English 16 registdon
numbers were used to project the number of d o n s required, daylong w ~ ~ owere
p sheld,
and protocols for pordblios and self-assessment essays were developed.
By the first year of implementation, 2003-2004, some changes had been recommended
and implemented. Library Learning Sessions, for instance, had to be formally part of the course
syllabus (not dropins), though the initial three sessions the Library had recommended were, at
the suggestion of Library faculty and with concurrence of instructors, reduced to two 75 minute
sessions, and were redesigned to enhance students' capacity to choose more critically the
supporting materials they intended to. build into their papers. Faculty msignments became
models for discussion and analysis, so that a body of successfil learning examples could be
shared and utilized. A published reader was produced, which included those readings most
strongly recommended by fi~culty,short biographical introductions of authors, study questions
for the readings, and most important, an organized layout that provsded direct support fbr the
.......................
conceptual approach to inquiry into central ideas of COS.
&gg!&
It was agreed that all fblltime faculty, fiom all departments, would be eligible to teach
COS once the Faculty Prep Seminar and daylong Workshop had been completed. Also part of
the original agreement was that a limited number of adjuncts recommended by their disciplinary
departments would be welcome, and that they would receive an additional compensation of
$1,00Gamended in the following Union Contract to "one credit compensation at rank for one
or more sections in the same term"--to acknowledge the additional time required by
collaborative teaching assignments. Faculty who had been through both the Seminars and
Workshop were to teach at least one section each year fbr two years, though they were welcome
to teach more Lf they wished to, and if sections were available.
Administration
A Director (initially co-directors) was to conduct semiws, schedule classes, recruit
personnel, process papers and maintain files. A COS Advisory Board, linked to the WAC
Advisory Board via the directors' sitting on each other's Boards, was to promote greater campus
access to professional development, and help clarify the Writing Intensive element of COS.
Campus-wide h l t y recruitment invitations, signed by all sitting Academic Dens and the Vice
President for Academic Affairs, were circulated by Spring 2002. Faculty Prep Seminars
continue to be offered each term (See Appendix 3 for instructors since 2003).
Stmctural Elements
?%e?naticSlructure
In order to promote the objective of encouraging abstract thinking, and to accommodate
the Project's commitment to welcome b l t y fiom all disciplines, the Planning Committee
decided that COS be organized around a theme, and one that is pertinent to all kinds of expertise.
The vote went to "The Idea of the Human"--enormously broad, but necessarily to be approached
fiom many viewpoints and bodies of knowledge already available on campus. Faculty were to
be invited to create "sub-themes," or particular problemdquestionsStopics that could provided a
h e w o r k for discussion and exploration (and tap the particular enthusiasms of instructors).
Given the overall theme, Planning Committee members agreed that "the human" should be
examined in terms of fundamentals: the ability to communicate; need to create; capacity to be
flexible; relationships to the natural environment; propensity to create social groups. These
central ways of examining a common theme are the sections delineated in the course reading,
?Be I&
of the Human:Scientrijic I q i r y ; &cia1 Commentary; Artistic Expression. (See
Appendix 4 for information about the reader.) These three angles of inquiry also generated a
wide range of exploratory sites, fiom the United nations to art museums; from artistic
performances to the American Museum of Natural History and local zoos.
Fieldhip and Joint Sesrons
Fieldtrips and cultural exposure were, from the start, presumed to be essential
components of an extended examination of human activity. They were q d to help build a
community of learners inclusive of students fiom different ~
O
R
of COS,
I
links between field experiences and joint sessions (where multiple m t h s
anrt to
sh
fir an
eventAebate, film, talk, discussion of shared notes on excursions). All these dsments of COS
are designed and implemented by individual h l t y , or instructorswokhg as team members.
wn'tin8 ~nte-' Component
This aspect of COS builds on collaboration with Library Faculty. Instnwtm m e the
assignments students carry with them into Library Sessions, where they practice mwehing for
information, and eventudly screening usefU.1fiom uselesg materid. F a l l o w WI amrw
guidelines, COS requires 20 pages of graded writing, including but not limited to a 6-10 page
research paper for which at last two drzrfts are required. Othx b d s ofwaiting may inoluucle
Response Pqers, Annotated Bibliographies, Thesis Statements, J a d s , Summary No&s an
lectures, and short eways for small group d i work. Topim eelesteQ mqdifqrthe d
y
h
l
f m of COS as elaborated by a particular instructor.
All students submit a Portfolio at the end of the tenn, included in which is a short seIfassessment essay completed at the end of the semester.
The Library Faculty fiom the start has worked hard to help develop the Library Leaning
component of this course, and has now implemented a rotation such that over time almost all
Library Faculty will be prepared to engage with COS students.
Oral Presentatr'ons
One dimension of seminar structure ~sule emphasis on speaking and listening. Class
size, now capped at 22, helps make focused and sustained discussion on serious subjects
possible. The planning Committee also agreed that all final research projects must be presented
orally in abstracted fbrm (some instructors require that the abstract be one of the formal, graded,
writing assignments). One week is usually devoted to these presentations, at the end of the term,
which gives all students a chance to hear one another's work, learn to put questions to each
other, and interact in discussions of their own work.
Buildiing a Learning Ctnnmt~l~ty
All of the above activities are to be designed to further the interactive and communally
undertaken investigations faculty include in their syllabi. Being conscious &omthe outset of the
need to support student efforts to work together, develop intellectual independence, and
participate actively in class, faculty design with a degree of intentionality that undergirds the
nature of the COS experience. Faculty report a higher degree of cross-dimiplin%ry engagement
with one another, which they have attributed to the Prep S
a S d o n Pwfmm and prlmmhg
for Fieldtrips and Joint Sessions. The daylong Workshop consistedy is well rc\rimd &r this,
many, attributes.
Budget
The Core Curriculum Committee's o&inal proposal to the Farxllty Senate included an
1
'I
outline of fiscal support derived fiom the Provost's budget. It was to cover a modest h o n d u m
for those taking the five-seminar prep sequence, for all who complete the Workshop e a ~ term,
h
and to support some instructors each year when they present at or attend conferences related to
COS. There was to be a modest administrative structure: director(s), allocated six credits per
term released time (since 2005-2006 it's been one director). By Fall 2005 it was char that more
"office" hours were needed, and an Administrative Coordinator poition, 10 hours per week for
1 1 months a year, was created to handle scheduling classes, processhg workloads and contracts,
booking spaces for joint sessions, reserving Library faculty for the requiresd 2.5 burs of Libmy
learning built into each course, administering questionnaires and other asmment downeats,
and fielding instructional problems, change of grades, &c:for about 1,000 students a year.
Assessment and Reoortiqg
It is unusual to administer a full assessment befbrethe fifth year of a project, but COS has
been using informal assessment throughout its existace. During the Planning Year decisions
were reached by consensus; recurrent review of course elements ( r e a d i i lorboMes,
fieldtrips) to measure the degree to which they implemented fundameatid cod-s
of COS
to Core Curriculum objectives was a part of meeting deliberations. Further, the d n g s
themselves, selected by consensus and review, were revisited at the end of each tam during the
2001-2002 and 2002-2003 period to assess f k u l t y l response.
~
Read-
produced by
photocopy through the Pilot Project Year, were assembled into a text by Fall, 2003. %I&
of
ttse Human was reviewed for a second printing for 2005, and is being edited once again for a
third edition to come out Summer 2007. Copley Publishing Company, which produces this tsrt,
features it at national higher education meetings such as the AAC&U annual d e r e n c e to
market its services to other colleges; a competitor has visited us, and said that our cunent
(second) edition is high quality and very modestly priced; and one COS student has taka a wpy
to her high school to suggest they use it for an d e r a t e d senior course option that resembles
the COS theme and could benefit fiom this anthology of readings.
Formal reporting includes an annual Budget Report to the Provost. There is a laboratory
fee students pay which provides subsidies for more expensive fieldtrips, but so far this fugd is
only modestly tapped. This may be, in part, because f h l t y have b n searching fbr less
expensive options ("suggested donations" venues and free nights at museums) and is an area
being monitored.
Some questionnaires have been developed, partmlarly for Libmy Learning. An early
one, during the Pilot Project phase, was considered unm~~e8shl:
poor rapam to an online
form, contbsed entries. This year a questionnaire derived from one circulated by the campus
Assessment Committee was tried in Fall 2006, but review suggests it is not quite @fie
enough
for COS. A revised version was distributed February 2007, (see Appendix 5); it will be treated
as a jm-and-post survey, and collected again at the end of the term. Part I d t s have been
tabulated, with 10W of sections submitting responses, and will be coIlslprared with exit m e y s
fbr this same cohort of students.
One of the potentially most important tools is the Portfolio: both students and their
instructors submit them. Included in the student Portfblir, is a self-assessment essay intended to
increase the awareness of students about their own acquisition of skills arnd capwity to
in
open-ended inquiry (See Appendix 6 for Self-Assessment Assignment.) This summary, and the
results of preliminary surveys, are to be reviewed by the COS Advimry B o d in M a r 4 and
Committee, the Faculty Senate, and Dean of Arts and Sciences. The most recent insrmrnent
generated is a set of 12 questions to be administered with the m p u e w i d e course evaluation
project. (See Appendix 7 fbr these questions.) Ifthe response gene-
u&l
infkmmtion, we
will ask that it be included in the annual machine-tabulated campus evaludon, but fbr Spring
2007 the results will be tabulated by members of the COS Advisory Bmd.
A chart indicating the munber of sectiorks and registrants is attached (See Appendix 8).
Working with the registration/performmx data we see that although in m l y stagm some
students attempted COS without the pre-requisite English 16,the number doing 90 was
diminished, and faculty are helping to i d e e them in time for them to s w i a to the prerequisite course first. It would be wonderful if the new ERP system eould prevent "cmm
jumping," but until that can be guaranteed, the Writing Center md COS will csllbrate to
m
n
tstudent m r and firilure.
A review of those who earned an "F'or "Wfor COS shows a number ofthhgs:
Many students postpone taking COS until their senior year; one or two mi@t have
been able to graduate.
The Arts and Sciences mandate that transfkr students without an AA Degree must
take this course seems to be working, on the whole.
A significant number of those who initially earned an "I"'or 'W take COS one or
more times, eventually earning a passing grade. Some excel, when they finally
actually take this course (See Appendix 9).
Gndes
Since full implementation of COS in Fall 2003, them have been 149 d o n %with r total
registration of 2,724. Initial expectations that spring enrollment would make the hmviwt
demand for sections have been borne out:
Fall
AcadernicYcar
Spring
Sections
Sdnts
Skctiom
Stuaknts
17
335
362
423
24
24
26
424
473
473
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
19
23
Summer
Stmiknts
Sections
76
78
70
4
6
6
Scheduling of sections has permitted progression toward the degree (44evening d o n s
and one Saturday section), and since Summer '05 six sections in Summer, two of them in
Summer II. This allows off-site students to &Ifill graduation requirements on campus.
Additionally, it allows students who must retake the course to do so with some ease.
This last named, "re-take," population provides some intenst@ info&on.
Since Fall
2003 there have been 507 grades earned below "D:199 "F" and 308 'W."Of these,101
(19.9%) have so far earned passing grades after redakhg COS (in some cases multiple times).
This review indicates:
1.
The majority of those whose grades were not pawing appear to be attrition figures
thin two-- smst-ers (some continue to have registration blocks, which means they
---.-
I
-?
miy not roregiier until the blocks are removed). fifteen (15) were dhmisrd for
academic reasons (low GPA); many more whose GPA &I1 to 0.50-1.95 bvp not reregistered fbr courses as of the end of summer, 2006.
2. Many who earned passing grades in subsequent semesters did so after
mod than one
attempt, over several semesters (up to5 teams).
3. Serial repeaters often show a pattern of W,
U W and F for cswses requiring
signifiamt r e a d i m g expectations, English 16 especially.
4.
Of these initially u n s u d l 5 0 5 students, 101 (19.9940)did s u c c d in wbqwnt
semestem, sometimes two years later, sometimes after a d d i t i d 7"" or WhiV grades
earned.
5. Grades finally earned ranged &om A (12, or 11.8%) and A- (% or ~.WO),
with the
majority (43 or 42.57%) in the "C" range, which suggest that these students could
have succeeded earlier.
6. In dl, 2,214 students to date passed the course wentdly. Tfnis rep-$8
1.3% of
total registrations.
A preliminary consideration of these observations suggests a) that writing intensive
courses may be especially daunting to some students, and that b) f i d problem8 m y be
overwhelming students who might succeed academically if letis pressured by p
d
circumstances.
Facultv P r e ~
SerninarlWorksho~s
As indicated above, there is a modest honorarium available for faculty who devote
themselves to the preparation .component of this Project. To date it is a total of $250 per person
for those who complete the entire sequence. All instructors who complete the entire 9:30-3:30
Workshop receive an honorarium of $75 every time they participate.
Notes fiom the Planning Year, Pilot Project, and all prep sessions/workshopsindicate that
there has been consistent focus on the learning objectives to which the COS is dedicated.
Sessions devoted to seminar discussion of difficult readings, variations on writing assignments,
issues of support and evaluation, review of resources available to students (tutoring, Writing
Center prime among them), and experimenting with how to provide ongoing and targeted help
with Library search skills, have been scheduled every semester. Faculty discussions on readings
in the text and other material they themselves submit contribute to the development of an
intellectual community and are strong features of the preparation phase. There is conscious
8~~0mmodation
to the expressed needs of specific cohorts of faculty in the Prep phase. those
who want to concentrate on critical reading strategies, or s e q u d writing asdpments, or
structured explorations, choose the fbci of two out of the five required seminar& and help shape
the Workshop (where continuing faculty team with newcomers who will be the'u partners in the
upcoming semester). Evgr effort is made to clasifjlways of moving students towad l&g
the stated objectives of COS and to help faculty develop creative ways ofteaching this
demanding seminar.
Facultv Develo~ment
Participation in peer-reviewed conferences and presentations at national conferences have
been a feature of the COS project since 2001. As early as July 2002 a team of four faculty and
the co-directors was accepted into AAC&U's Institute on Campus Leadership for Sustainable
Innovation. Consultants assigned to the LIU team, peer cohorts of multiple colleges, and an
"action plan* the COS team produced by the end of that Institute helped h m e the process steps
for Brooklyn's COS project.
A team proposal was accepted for presentation at the January 2005 a
.A A W
conference, where faculty presented on the varieties of skills acquisition derived fiom particular
elements of the COS design and assignments. As part of the LIU Teaching and Learning
initiatives the Director of COS presented on cross-disciplinary initiatives in the University-wide
Teaching and Learning conference March 1,2006. A presentation on designing joint sessions is
scheduled for the Faculty Forum in April 2007 to be given by two current COS faculty.
Examples of assignments used in COS classes have also been presented in Faculty Development
Workshops sponsored by the Writing Across the Curriculum Program.
The emphasis on intentionality in design and execution of COS has begpin to produce
reflective practice among COS instructors. It is hoped that scholarly publiaitions resulting fiom
their efforts in the COS project will begin to appear in refereed journals. It is encouraging to
note that national leaders in higher education have already shown interest in the nature and scope
of Brooklyn's COS project, and that interest among peers in the COS reading anthology persists.
Issues to Address
Although the course is capped at 22 registrants (occasionally faculty permit overtallies for
students they particularly want in their sections), that is a large number in a course with so
many elements to juggle, and that has this much writing. The original proposal as approved
by the Faculty Senate was to cap the course at 20. A downward shift might create a burden
to recruit more instructors, but might be worth that risk.
Faculty who have devoted the time and energy to undertaking a project that is, fbr all, a high
risk endeavor the first time around (the second time appears to be experienced as perceptibly
more pleasurable to k l t y ) should be acknowledge and supported. The Director(s) and
Advisory Board have fiom the start spoken of the need for ongoing professional development
initiatives that could help individuals sustain their sense of excitement, and &el like
unfolding teaching adventures. Among the ideas'floated is the search for finding to support
intense faculty Institutes, one to three weeks long, in which the idea of the prep seminar
might be deepened and lengthened to include discussions modeled on the NEH grants this
campus enjoyed in the 19907s,and workshop practica similar to those hnded by the Pew
Grant of the 1990's.
Recruitment efforts, given the happy circumstance of new hires over the past four years, need
to be reshaped, and be actively supported by all Academic Deans and the Vice President for
~cadekicAffairs, as was the case initially, so that the entire campus c o m m w can be
included as the project moves forward.
'&:
!'*
. .. .: .. .
-
a
8
.
1.
Review the marketing for remuitin8 new b l t y and increase efforts to bring new-rs
into
the project.
2. Establish a M1-time staE111g pattern that provides
and allows fbr
institutionalizing of the best elements of the COS Project as it has so fiu d e v e w . In
addition to the heavy volume of paperlonline work required, this office could initiate a search
for presenters on campus and/or opportunities for probional development programs off
campus, to which COS faculty might apply on a competitive basis, and enjoy support from
the University if accepted.
Appendices
Descri~tion
LIU Mission Statement, Rationale for New Core and
Description of Core Seminar
Planning Copunittee for COS (2001-2002)
Instructors of Core Seminar
Contents and Frontmatter fiom the COS Reader
Library Survey and Summary of Results
COS Portfolio Instructions (Student and Instructor)
Student Evaluation ~uestionkire
GradedDemography
Note on Students Retaking COS 50
Appendix l
LIU Mission Statement,
Rationale for New Core!?=
and Description of Core Seminar
LONG ISLAND IJlUWRSITY
BROOKLYN CAMPUS
MISSION STATEMENT
-'-T
Ii
o-
.
=
i
-
-
kpmaed in its still-relevant motto Urbi et Wi the mission of Long Idand University
since 1926 has been to open the doors of the city and the world to men and women of all ethnic
who wish to achieve the satisfaction of the educsted life and to
and s o c i ~ n o m i c
serve the public good. Its mission is to awakea, enlighten and expaud the minds ofits students.
G d o n after gemeation, the students who have enrolled in the Brooklyn Campus of .
Long Island University have come fiom d e d , primarily urban backlgrounds. L i e their
predemssors, many of today's studesds are new to America and new to the English language or
are the first in their -lies
to seek a university education. At the Bmklyn Campus,d l
students find an academic community where uhral, ethnic, religious, racial, sexual,and
individual differences are respectedand where commoditiesare affirmed. 'Ibis q u i r e s the
Campusto be open and welcoming even as it maintains respect k intellectual, culturaland
academic traditions.
Nationally r d e d , the h d t y has a strong commitment to teachiag,to j m m d
advisement of students, to the Mle& range of scholarship, and to &culty development and
service.
The Brooklyn Campw recognizes both the firculty's training and experience and the
chamcter of its diverse student body as two of its greatest streargths aud challenges. No matter
what their background or generation, students come to the Brooklyn Campwto build the
educational and intellectual f b u d d m s fix successfir1 personal lives and careers. The Campls
fkdty and administration believe tbat a liberal education, aloag with
pmpmtion fbr a
hifilling career,is the best way to achieve this end.
To carry out its mission, the Brooklyn Campus offers c o w v e w&qmhte
~~~pportedby9ddcourses&r~~kno~l~andgraduateprosramsin
those areas in which it has developed strength or has a unique contributionto make. In addition,
the Campus hrs designed progmnsto permit students to acquire egeential literates, intellectual
curiosity, analytic and d
g skill4 and effective communication skills. In this way, the
Campus ~ervesas a mwmator of knowledge, a source and promulgator af new knowledge, and
a resome &r the comnurnity it Serves.
RATIONALE FOR NEW CORE
We are convinced that the proposed core curriculum embraces the spirit dour
institution's missiqn:
No nrafter what their bachgroud or genemlioot, sidmts come
Gmpa to build the & c a t i d d intelbckral
to the
f d a ~ t s - s r r c e e s s j W ~ lives
1 d amers....In
&tion, the Camps hts cksignedpmpams to permit sh&nts
to acqrrire esse~reamningskiZbdeflective ccmmdcafion
&lb. In this w,the Gmpus~aarplrssas a aq f
knowle&e, asowce d
p
r
d
m ofnew k#mh&e, d a
resoilrcefw the community it serves.
Moreover, the new core proposal satistiesthe core curriculumgoals,as stated in the
Middle States SeYlrtuij, 1993, and updated by the Core Curriculum Comdtee in 1998:
Goal 1: Ch@ive skills: To he@stdnts -hen
inquiry, abstmct thinRmg, andcriticalanalysis
their cqm&iesfbr
The aim is to enhance studeW abilii to:
uederstand,analyze, and hteqmt reading and other
a.
makrialcritically
b.
write organized, coherent discow
c.
speak
permwivediscourse
d.
listen critically
e.
mearch e £ E c i d y and knowledgeably
f
reesonabgtractly
8.
interpret numericaldata
Goal 2: Knowledge: To he@dacquire a g m e d tmdkra borl),ofkmvledgr!in a w e t y ofcontentcaeasandajbmWonfw
*her -i
bww
Studemts will be prepared to:
a. demonstrate knowledge and awareness of philosophical and
ethical issues
b. demonstrate an undof literary genres and world
lilterary schools
c. display an understanding of fundamental scientific ad
-cal
concepts and an ammess of the impac? of
technology on society and the en+ownent
d. identi@ a d understand general historid trends in world
c i v i l ~ o nand
s demonstratebiliarity with social science
concepts and ideas
of
Goal 3: Perspedves and Behavior: To he@shuhts dwhp resgectfw
both human commomditiesand human dktsiQ
To take responsibility for their choices and for their roles in society,
student will be trained to:
a gain historical and diverse jxmpctives (h
example,
scientific, aesthetic, social, etc.)
b. develop their abilii to reflect on ethical issues and to develop
a sense of ethical behavior
In addition, the proposed new core successfidlyintegrates I n k d o n Literacy
throughoutthedculum,thusinwuingthatgraduates~theabilityto~~eve,
d u a t e , and use information effkdvely. Infbrmation Literacy,~ o d l known
y as library
research skills. is outlined bv Middle States to include
the
hllowinzt:
7-7
., .-4,
- *1.
The iaformation-hem& hht(or the skilled researcb&r) is ableto determine the
nature and exteat of the hfhmtion needed.
2.
The hfbrrnation-literate studeat is able to access n d information &edively
and efficiently.
3.
The infdon-literate shdent is able tomduate hhmationand its sources
critically and incorporates selected idbrmation into his or her knowledge base
and value system. .
The i n f d c m - sadent is able to use infbnmston effectively to
4.
accomplish a specific purpose.
5.
The skilled researcher understandsthe d c , legal and s o d issues
surround'i the use of information and accesses and uses inibrmation ethically
and legally.
b
7
Core Sei
Core Seminar Goals
The goal of the Core Seminar is to createa common intellectual experiencethat precedes
advanced dikiplinary study, develops along with the accumulation of disciplinebased
knowledge and continues to provide a way of understanding and htemdngwith the world after
fbrmal education is completed. Faculty not only amtdmte knowledge in their partial= ama of
expertise, but also serve as models of liberally educated individuals who are able to think
critically and reflectively and act sensitively in a variety of M l i a r and unfamiliar situations.
Rationale
Since the ibcus of the Core Seminar is on developing and enhaucingcritical reading and
thiaking skills, infbrmaton gaherbg skills and writing and communication skills, the idea of
o q p k h g the seminar around a general theme that can be explored in a variety of ways by
people fiom a variety of disciplines is very appealing. Such organidon allows h d t y
members &om across the campus to use their expertise and model their @& approachesto
idimwh-nafherinn and problem-solving. Students can become acquainted with a variety of
approadw to learning and thinking while enjoying a "common expeaiencen provided by the
common theme, a basic set of common madings &omdifferent disciplines, small group
i ~ o n shands-on
,
problem solving activities and large group presentations. Also, all
sectiomoftheCore Seminarwill bewriting intensiveandwill honthedevelopmentof
i&mnation literacy skills, u t i l i i available resovrcesof the library and the WAC program. A
common theme, selected by the coordinator and the advisary board, will provide the fbcus
aroundwhichtheeoreseminarwillbedeveloped. Thetheme,whichwillbethesarncfbrall
~0118ofdco~willbebrde~l~~toallmpro~withdiff~areasofexpeatise
to engage their students in fbcused, in-depth explorations &red problems and questions &om
the points of view of their varying disciplines. A common set of readings related to the theme
will be used in all seztions of the Core Seminar to insure that all s t u b taking the Core
Seminar will have a common experience. Such crossdisciplinary inquiry emmmges students to
seek relationships between various areas of study and to begin to think in abstract and analytical
ways. A sense of community may also be created when students with a variety of backpu&
engage in serious, shared reading, think@ and working activities. Scheduledfield trips to a
variety of local hsthions serve to broaden the students' information gathering experiences and
stre@m their sense of community.
The Core Serrninar described below offers students a variety of educational experiences
while focusing on the goals and objectives particular to this course. Small groups of students
meet regularly with a ibculty member in a seminar setting to engage in hands-on problem solving
activities. Three or four times a semester, larger groups of students (cohZ,rts)meet together to
listen to p d o n s that present new information ha variety of ways and serve asthe basis fir
the small group d i d o n sessions.
The courseis organized so that three or four sections are offered at the same time. Iffour
cohort sections are offered, four faculty members from different disciplines, drawn &omthe
entire hcdty, will each teach a section of no more than 20 students. These four faculty members
and a libmian, primarily responsible for developing i n t b d o n litskills, will be a team.
The cohort team plans toge&er how it will deal with the theme for the cohort sections. For
example, each instructor mightdecide to focus on a different aspect of the theme and each
approach it from the point of view of a d i f F ' discipline. The team, with the help of the
librariaq also i d d e s any additional readings to be used within the cohort or in specific
d o n s . The librarian works with the rest of the team to develop activities such as research
assignments and library idbrmationsearches. Each fkadty member is msjmsible for and
completely in charge of hidher own section, but is also responsible for making one w o n
per semester to all the students in the cohort sedions. In addition, team members serve as
resources for each other.
Each W t y member cora<hrcts hidher section of the Core Seminar us@ any techniques,
strategies, materialq and .
qjma&es deemed appropriate, as long as the basic objectives of the
gathering, problem-solving, worlcing
c o u r s e ( g i t i c a l hfbmation
~
collaboratively) are met and as long as the course is writing intensive as provided by the
guidelines of the WAC Committee. While a common core of readings is requited for everyone,
additional readings for students in a partkdar section may be selected by the &dty member
teaching that section. Each member of the team is also responsible for making one presenhtiion
to all of the students in the cohort d o n s during a regularly scheduled class period. This might
serve as a summary discussion of entent already d i d and/or an introductionto new
material. These large group sessions'provide intbrmation for and act as the f e r n of the
small group sessions within the cohort.
Faculty membersteach only one section of Core Seminar per semeskrybut it is hoped
that once a k d t y member begins to participate in the process, that peason will continue to teach
one section of the Core Seminar each semester for a two-year period, the length of time a ttreme
is expected to last. Each faculty cohort team needs some time to work togedwr to plan the
sessioq coordinatethe lectures and discuss implementation and assessment stmtegies. If the
same cohorts remain in place for the two-year period, however, the r e q u i d planuing time will
be sigaifiantlyreduced dbr the first semester.
In addition to the &culty needed to teach the sections of the Core Seaninar, a coordinator
of the Core Seminar and a d l advisory board are also required. The Coordinator is a W-time
faculty member, recommended by the Conolly College Curriculum Committee and appointed by
the Dean of Conolly College, who meives six credits ofreleased time each semester and who
also teaches a d o n of the Core Seminar, at least initidly (to monitor how the process is
working). A nine-member advisory board, the Core Studies Coordination Committee (CSCC),
consisting of one member from each of the divisions of Conolly College, one member from each
of the professional schools, and one member fiom the library, works with the Coordinator and
also serves as liaison with the full-time faculty and the Campus Curriculum Committee. The
CSCC members will be chosen by their respectilveunits. CSCC board members might also each
teach a section of the Core Seminar. The camhator, along with the CSCC Board, is
responsible for idthe theme, setting the criteria fbr selection of&cultyychoosing
~ c t o rand
s h n h g cohort groups, organizing a general assessment of the Core Seminar and
.
,
warking with the teaching thulty throughout the semester. ThR coordinator is also responsible
fir writing regular progress and assessment reports and sharing the results with the Faculty
Smate and the School of Warmacy Council as well as reporting to the Bwldyn Campus
Curriculum Co&
and the Dean of C o d y College on a regular basis.
Appendix 2
Planning Committee for COS
(2001-2002)
Planning Committee for Core Seminar
2001-2002
Name
-
De~artment
Rhiannon Allen
Nina Bennahum
Mark Birchette
Gloria Cooper
Margaret Cuonu,
Marla del Collins
Leah Dilworth
John Lonie
Sonia Murrow
Robert Nelson
John Sannuto
Gladys Schrynemakers
Chris Sorenson
Margery Su;zepanski
Linda Zelski
Psychology
Communications
Biology
Music
Philosophy
Communications
English
Pharmacy
Education
Library
Communications
Provost/Sociology
Business
Occupational Therapy
Nursing
Bernice Braid and A1 DiMaio
Co-Chairs
Appendix 3
Instructors of Core Seminar
Instructors for Core Seminar
2003-2006
Instructor
Instructor
Sayed Ali
Shariq Ali
Rhiannon Allen
Melissa Antinori t
Linda Apton *
Kim Bach *
Nina Bennahum
Mark Birchette
Marilyn Boutwell
William Burgos
Sarah Blazer *
Sarah Campbell *
Gloria Cooper
Margaret Cuonzo
Marla del Collins
Leah Dilworth
John Ehrenberg
Joe Filonowicz
Claire Goodman
Inna Gorbatov
Susan Halio
Mary Herbert *
Partick Homgan
Sam Jones
Susanna Jones
Yusef Juwayeye
Pharmacy
Sociology
Psychology
English
Art
Media Arts
Communications
Biology
English
WAC
English
English
Music
Philosophy
Communications
English
Political Science
Philosophy
Media Arts
Languages
HEOP/English
English
Enghsh
Social Work
Social Work
Anthropology
Angela Koritsoglou*
Elizabeth Kudadjie-Gymfi
Kimberly Lamm *
Ann Larson
Eric Lehman *
Celia Lichtman
John Lonie
Sophia Mavrogiannis *
Sonia Murrow
Barbara Parisi
Marni Passer
Michael Pelias *
Kevin Reyes *
Amy Robinson *
Jessica Rosenberg
John Sannuto
Tamika Scholes
George Sideris
Michael Sohn t
Gladys Schrynemalcers
Elizabeth Stone
Margery Szczepanski
Morgan Schulz *
Meiyu Su
Loraine Wankoff
Linda Zelski
English
Psychology
English
English
English
Languages
Pharmacy
English
Education
Communications
Business
Philosophy
English
Philosophy
Social Work
Communications
Business
Biology
English
Pmvost/Sociology
Pharmacy
Occ. Therapy
English
Mathematics
p-cy
Nursing
Additional Instructors for 2006-2007
June Baird *
Van Baird *
Kuan Chiang
Adva Dinur
Alan Grose *
* notes Adjuncts
English
English
Business
Business
Philosophy
7 notes Adjunct who is now fill-time
Rochelle Isaac *
Jim Lyttle
Susan Payne-Mulliken
Francine Tyler *
English
Business
PhycWCommunic
& Advising
Art
Full-time Faculty
Adjuncts
38 (of whom 7 are administrators)
13 (including two who are now kl-time administrators)
Full-time Faculty
Adjuncts
:
N
to date, only Adjuncts have chose to teach multiple sections in a single term; only
Adjuncts and Full-time Administrators have requested sections in Summer
Sessions.
Appendix 4
Contents and Frontmatter from the COS Reader
Chronological Table of Contents
Preface
I. Social/Political I n a u h Documents and Commentarv 1
1
.r
.r
What is the role that order, power, meaning, and faith play in the human
experience of soeial interactions?
U. N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
U. N. Universal Declaration on Women's Rights
The Declaration of Independence
@n Bichmann in Jerusalem
Hannah Arendt
from Politics
Aristotle
,
The Social Psychology of Modem Slavery
Kevin Bales
jEom The Progress of the Human Mind
Antoine-Nicholas de Condorcet
A Moral Code for a Finite World
Herschel Elliot and Richard D.Lamm
jhm Man's Search for Meaning
V i m E. FranW
The Tragedy of the Commons
G a n t t &din
#hmLeviathan
Thomas Hobbes
-
The Revolt of Islam
Bernard Lewis
f i m The Protean Self:Human Resilience in an
Age of Fragmentation
lay Lifm
Community, Conflict, and Ways of Knowing
Parker J. P a l m
New Women of the Ice Age
Heather Pringle
jkm The Social Contract
Jean-JacquesRousseau
jkm Diecourse on Inequality
Jean-JacquesRousseau
11. Scientific Inqujr: Observation and Analysis
185
Where do humansfit into the natural world? What is the role of language
in shaping and measuring h e human experience?
Why We Take Risks
Richard Connif
from The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man
Charles Darwin
jkwn The Mismeasure of Man
Stephen Jay Gould
Learning as Biological Brain Change
Robert Leamnson
f b m Human Variation: Race, Type and Ethnic Groups
Stephen Molnar
jkwn The Monkey in the Mirror
Ian Tattersall
111. Imaginative Inquiry: Creativity and Interpretation 261
How do humans imagine, apmm, and experience themelves in the world?
Poems
Maya Angelou
The Myth of Sisyphus
Albert Camus
front The Alchemist
Paul0 C m h
front The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson
Emily Dickingon
Little Gidding
T. S. Elwt
The Motive for Metaphor
Northrop Frye
Poems
Langston Hughes
Harlem
Theme for English B
The Metamorphosis
Franz Kapcll
Before the Law
Franz K a j h
%'Paper
Robert Musil
Poems
Pablo Neruda
El Nfio PerdidoILittle Boy Lost
Walking Aro~~nd
Jobs
Grace Paley
E l ~ / T h River
e
Octavio Paz
Duino Elegies / The Eighth and Ninth Elegies
Ruiner Maria Ri2ke
fim Song of Myself
Walt Whitman
,-
.. .
..
'
. i':
*-
-A.
.
1
"
)
.. '.
,
.
.%.
.
'
.
.,:
*
.'
..
f
'
>-
-
,
+
m
-
=.*-&:
.. .
Chronological Table of Contents
4th entury B.C
Aristotle. Politics.
Hobbes, Thomas. Lmiathan.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. Discourse on Inequality.
The Declaration of Independence,
United States Congress.
1776
De Condoret, Antoine-Nicholas. The Progress
of the Human Mind.
Whitman, Walt. Song of Myself.
Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species.
1861-1864 D
i
w Emily. The Complete Poems
Musil, Robert. Flypaper.
Kafka, Franz. The Metamorphosis.
Ka£ka, Franz. Before the Law.
Rilke, Rainer Maria. Duiw Elegies, The Eighth
and Ninth Elegies.
Neruda, Pablo. Walking Around.
Eliot, T. S. Little Gidding, No. 4 of Four Quartets.
,:.-
l9M
Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
United Nations.
3953
Paz, Octavio. El Rfo/The River
@55
.:.
:. -: .
...
.. .
$ .
.
Camus, Albert. The Myth of Sisyphus.
Neruda, Pablo. El Nifio Perdido.
-:
" .' .;..... .
... .; &.;
."
-.", :<@
Arendt, Hannah. Eichmann in Jenrsalem.
%
,.
.f.,'..<.
. :.,
'
Frye, Norhop. The Motive for Metaphor.
Bmnowski, Jacob. The Reach of the Imagination.
xi
xii
Quon01ogical Table of Contents
'UniversalDeclaration on Women's Rightsl
10
United Nations.
HardinI Garrett. The Tragedy of the Commons.
Angelou, Maya. I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.
Angelou, Maya. Still I Rise.
Gould, stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Mmr.
Frankl, Viktor. Man's Searchfm Meaning:
An Introduction to Logotherapy.
BergerrJohn The Sense of Sight
PalmerI Parker J. Communityl Conflict, and
Ways of Knowing.
Lifton, Robert Jay. The Protean Self: Human
Resilience in an Age of Fragmentation.
CoelhoI Paulo. The Alchemist.
Molmq Stephen.Humn Vmiation:RumI Types
and Eth~icGroups.
Paley, Grace.Jobs.
m e l Heather. New Women of the Ice Age.
Leanuwon, Robert. Learning as Biological
Brain Change.
ConniffIRichard. Why We Take Risks.
Lewis, Bernard. The Revolt of Islam.
Bales, Kevin.The Social Psychology of Modern Slavery.
ElliotI Herschel and L a m I Richard D. A Moral Code
for a Finite World.
TattersallI Ian. The Monkey in the Mirror
262
Preface
T
e selections in this Core Seminar Reader d e c t multiple dimensions
of the seminar's theme: THE IDE9OF THE, HUMAN.They provide
a common basis or starting point for all patticipating students. Most of
the readings are considered either primary sources, such as documents or
speeches, or are critical, seminal texts that have had a significant impact
on our world. Among the readmgs are several which will be assigned to
ALL sections. The balance are included to provoke classroom discussion
and provide good browsing makrial.
In the broadest sense, the readings fall into three categories: Political
Inquiry:Documents and Commentary (social thought, community organization), including documents related to negotiated definitions of the
human. This section encompasses discussion of ways humans organize
their society, the power they exert, the way they reid their histories and
structure their collective lives. ScientificInquiry:Observation and Analysis (methods of inquiry into the natural universe)represents ways people
systematically explore their environmmt, observe its functions and collect, organize and apply their findings to the world around them. Imaginative Inquiry: Creativity and Interpretation (artistic expression and
cmativity) represents various ways humans manifest their creative
impulse, their glimpses of the human condition, of the world and relationships among politic& scientific and artistic aspects of the human
experience. Through the Political, Scientific, and Imaginative, these
authors raise questions, question assumptions and challenge us to look
anew at the problems they pose in their work.
'
I
In addition to careful reading of makrhh presented, you should consider
,,
* .'
'?
'
this anthology as a launch pad for further explorations. The various
pieces will provoke your thinking, and also provide a rich source of bib]Li~&raphical
references that allow you to go more deeply into questions
raised in class. AU readings deal with central problems or issues related
t~ the human condition. Both the p r o b l q and possible solutiom vary,
+#@mding
on the author's own context, which should be evident from
ctory passages on each author. Consecpently you should be
t perspectives projected by this collection, and be willing
relating the author's world views to the conscious develof personal viewpoints.
xiv
Preface
To help in this discovery of perspective, the course is organized into
groups of sections, taught by faculty in varying fields, which will combine monthly into laboratory sessions where the differences of viewpoint
should be amply illustrated.
Finally you will find some study questions to help you with your reading and interpretations, and a chronological list of readings to help you
shape both your projects and bibliographical research. We anticipate that
this course, and the many ways of learning it represents, will be exciting
and rewarding to you.
Bernice Braid, Director
Brooklyn, 2005
..
-
-
A
,
,
-
..-,
.
1
,
I..
,
,
Appendix 5
Library Survey and Summary of Results
Appendix 5
Ljkary Survey and Summary of Results
~
~
6
-
COS 50: The Idea of the Human
w
Section:
hamtor:
Bibliographic Instruction Survey
The infontdon Pom this survey will help the Library and the Core Seminar Program improve the qualiw of
insbuction regarding the use of bibliographic nesy)urces.
Library Inartdon.at LIU
1. I use the Internet for researchfor my classes at
Llu.
2. I have an LIU Library Bar Code.
8. I have already attended a h
i htructional
d o n for another class at LIU.
*Ifyouranswer is Yes, pkase continue to the
remaining questions below. Ifyour answer is
No, you may stop now.
9. During this hmudicmalsession, I took a tour of
the LIU Library.
4. I have wed the Electronic Databases available
though the LIU Library.
10. During this instmtional session, I learned about
ways to search for i n f o d o n in the LIU
Library.
5.
I have accessed the Electronic Resources of the
LIU Library from a remote location.
11. Duringthishmudionaldon,Il~edabout
how my LIU Library Bar Code can help me do
research h n locations offcampus.
6. 1 udemtad how to create a citation for my
$Qlm=.
12. During this instructional session, the presentation
was rel7. I un-
the ethics of infomation use (i.e.,
to a project I was working on for a
corn.
whentogivecredittotheideasorltmguageof
others and thereby avoid plagiarism).
13. During this hstmctional d o n , I received
bandouts containing infommtion tbat I can use in
the firture.
Bibliographic Survey Results
Responses for Spring 2007 (26 of 26 sections reporting)
Library Instmction at LlU
My Research Skills
8. I have already attended a library imtmctional
session for mother class at LIU.
--
2. I have an LIU Library Bar Code.
*Ifyoranswer is Yes, please continue to the
mmaining quesiions below. Ifymrr answer is No,
m "wstop
9. Dmingthis~onalsession,Itookatwrof
the LIU Library.
4. I have used the Electronic Databslsesavailable
through the LIU Li&my.
-
Yes
85.2%
N/R
0.0%
(26)
(150)
(0)
10. Duringthis immdional session, I leamed about
ways to scarch for information in Che LIU
Library.
No
61.1%
Yes
38.9%
N/R
0.0%
5.7%
Yes
93.7%
N/R
0.6%
(234)
(149)
(0)
(10)
(164)
(1)
I have aooessed the Electronic Resources of the
LIU Library fiom a remote location.
5.
No
14.8%
No
72.1%
Yes
27.7%.
N/R
0.3%
(276)
(106)
(1)
No
1 1. During this instructional session, I learned about
how my LIU Library Bar Code can help me do
research h m locations affcamgus.
1
No
24.6%
Yes
74.9%
N/R
0.6%
(43)
(131)
(1)
6. I understand how to create a citation for my
Soutces.
No
27.3%
Yes
72.2%
N/R
0.3%
(105)
(278)
(1)
7. I ~mderstaudthe ethics of bibmatiannse
12. During this hshmdional Won, the presentation
was relevant to a project I was working on for a
cmI!4e.
No
34.9%
Yes
64.6%
N/R
0.6'Yo
(61)
(1 13)
(1)
No
45.1%
Yes
54.3%
N/R
0.6%
(79)
(95)
(1)
End of the Semester Bibliographic Survey
Currently in Production
Appendix 6
COS Portfolio Instructions
(Student and Instructor)
1.-.-~
t
--
.'---
~
- -
-
-
.
.-..
-
.
--
-
27--=
- - --- ---
:
-
-
-. - .
FA-
A
L
-- - -
'. .-
..
.-
COS PORTFOLIO GUIDELINES
CORE SEMINAR FINAL PORTPOLIOS
I. Copies of your work which could include the following:
Response Papers
Journals
Field Trip Paper
a Paper related to term project (thesis development/drafts/etc.)
Propod
End-of-class notes
And should includeTWO copies of:
Term Paper
11. One page overall commentary on what the student thinks developed as a result of
the course's writing requirements. What aspects of your writing changed? What
still needs work?
111. A brief essay (I Yi pages) answering two questions (to be written on the last
dag of czass).
1. Remember that seven cognitive skills have been embraced by all core courses,
and this one has explicitly sought to address as many of them as possible within the
parameters of the core seminar. They are:
a. Understand, analyze, and interpret reading a d other material critically
b. Write organized,coherent discourse
c. Speak organized, persuasive discourse
d. Listen critically
e. Research efficiently and knowledgeably
f. Reason abstractly
g. Interpret numerical data
For the first part of this essay, your students must review this list of skills and
respond to this question: 'Which of these skills do you feel have improved as
ad
t of takingCore Seminar? Iden* specific assignments,readings,
and activities to which you c a n attribute your improvements."
2. For the second part of this essay, the question they must answer is: 'What do
you understand better or think about differently now than when you
~ t h i s ~ ~ ~ w h e n y o u t h i r r k o f ~ E I D To
E A O F ~ ~
what specilic ass@ment(s) do you attributethis shift?"
Im~ortantReminder: Please make sure that you tell students to make copies of
all their submitted work. Remember, unlike English 16 portfolios, these submitted
portfolios will be kept by the COS Directors in order to create long-term assessments
of the course.
COS PORTFOLIO GUIDELINES
Instructor PoFtfolio
11. All assignments (hand-outs given in addition to syllabus or a clear listing of them
separate,hm the syllabus)
111. For each assignment given, include a copy of the strongest submission. For
example, if you assignedtwo 5 page paper and 1ten page paper, you should include a
copy of the best submission of each of these assignments
IV.A brief statement on what wrts the most &kclive aspect of this COW
specific assignment, a joint session, a particular reading, etc.).
ppd why (a
* " m e "post* survey of library literacy will be ready a couple of weeks prior to the
end of the term. Please be SURE to have ALL students fill them out and submit them
BY the last day of class. Bring your sets of answered q u e s t i o m to
~ Pratt Building
514 no later than December 18,2006.
Remember that the University policy on absenteeism states that students cannot miss
more than 6 class hours-with a verified excuse-and any subsequent absences
require the student to be dropped. Atthis point in the semester the only options for
students missing an excessive number of classes is a "UW"or an "F."
INCOMPLETESARE DISCOURAGED, SO IF YOU HAVE STUDENTSTO WHOM
YOU ARE GMNG AN "ABS"PLEASE SUBMIT A LIST OF THE NAMES AND
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS BY December 22,2006.
STUDENTAND m?STRUCIYIRPORTFOLIOS ARE TO BE
SUBMITTED NO LATER l H A N T H E POF Jon-,
2007.
Appendix 7
Student Evaluation Questionnaire
ADDITIONAL ITEMS FOR COS 50: THE IDEA OF THE HUMAN
Section:
Instructor:
Use the following scale to answer the
questions below:
mngly
No
Strongly
Agree Agree Opinion DigreeDisagree
1
1. This course helped me to read complex texts more
critically.
2. This course helped me to develop my writing skills.
3. This course helped me to speak more clearly @or
example, in presentations or class discussions).
4. This course helped me to l i e n mom carefully.
I. This course helped me to develop my skills of
interpretation.
6.
This course helped me to we numerical data for
understanding complex topics.
'
7. Thii course helped me to appreciate imagination and to
think more creatively.
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
o n n n u
o n o n 0
n n n [ 7 u
n o o n n
o n n n o
n o o n 0
n n n n n
8.
The library sessions associated with this course helped
me to use the university library more effectively.
o
9.
The joint d o n s assodated with thii course helped me
to think about topics from multiple disciplinary
perspedi.
o n n u n
10. The field activities associated with this course helped me
to appreciate the resouextending my learning.
available in the dty for
11. This course helped me to do research more effectively.
12 This course helped me to think about complex topics
from multiple perspedives.
o
3
4
o
5
n
o u n o n
o n o n n
q q q q q
~
Appendix 8
GradesAIemography
Analysis of Grades Earned in COS 50
SWtYR.'
.
.-*
..
.:.
r
-
.-2y
.! - - L : i d F 2 d
Analysis of Passing and Failing Grades
2003-2006
Semester
Total
Registrants
2003-2004
845
2004-2005
913
2005-2006
966
Totals
2,724
Passing
Grades
684
81.W
762
83.5%
768
79.5%
5 214
81.3%
ForUW
Grades
159
18.8%
151
16.5%
197
20.4%
507
18.6%
Subsequent
Passing Grades
47
29.6%
33
21.8%
21
10.6%
101
19.9?/0
Note- A review of the individual academic records of students who earned an F or UW
revealed that many went on to take the course again (some more than once) and
ultimately to earn a passing grade. It was also learned that 15 of the students who earned
an F or UW (3.0%) have been officially dismissed fiom the University. (See also
Appendix 9.)
Appendix 9
Note on Students Retaking COS 50
Achieving a passing grade after having received an F or UW,by retaking COS,
can take several attempts, and/or several semesters. Figures tabulated below are fiom
February 2007. (See also Appendix 8).
845 Registrants
47 retakes with passing grade
913 Registrants
33 retakes with passing grade
966 Registrants
21 retakes with passing grade
A reexamination of retakes since 2004-2005 in Spring 2008 is likely to indicated
additional passing grades earned, based on the increased percentage of successll
attempts when measurements allow enough times to pass.
This preliminary scan of students who did not pass COS indicates that the
majority of t
hm w t~ q o U w i t h 4 Kmesters, m
below 2.0.
a ~ f t h e m l ~ with
n g a GPA