Implementation FAQ's
Frequently Asked Questions about Piloting the Proposed New Curriculum
What is a faculty’s commitment and compensation for participation in EYE and Mid-career pilot courses?
Faculty participating in the initial design and delivery of an EYE or Mid-career course will receive a $1500 summer stipend for course development and one course release. Generally, this release will be taken the first time the course is taught. If this is impossible, the release may be banked or the course may be taught as a one-time overload.
Faculty are expected to teach an EYE or Mid-career course at least three times, not necessarily consecutively.
More detailed information about faculty compensation and support for General Education courses during the pilot phase is available on the website: http://www.usm.maine.edu/gened/
How are “teams” for EYE and the mid-career course created and identified? If one has an idea for a new course but no team exists, how does the course come about?
Faculty who are interested in becoming involved in an EYE or a mid-career course but who are uncertain about potential collaborators may find potential collaborators in a number of ways. First, faculty may request assistance finding collaborators by contacting the Office of Undergraduate Education directly (780-4755, smcwilms@usm.maine.edu), or by checking the “need help finding possible collaborators” box on their New Course Proposal form. In addition, faculty may identify potential collaborators by visiting the Course Planning section of the general education website (www.usm.maine.edu/gened/). In addition, faculty may utilize the EYE faculty discussion board at USM’s blackboard site (see access information at www.usm.maine.edu/gened/).
Without a departmental course designation (e.g. PHI, POS, ECO, etc), how, if at all, does my department receive credit for hours generated?
By a simple rule: student credit hours follow the faculty member. Thus, if two faculty from a department teach three, three-credit sections of 30 students in Gen Ed designated courses, that department would get credit for the 270 “SCH.”
All courses in the general education curriculum will have general education prefixes (for example, EYE 101: Portrait of a Space). With the exception of EYE courses, all courses in the general education may also be cross listed with departmental prefixes, if departments so wish. Departments may also choose, rather than cross-listing, to incorporate general education courses into their major requirements.
When registering for a cross-listed course, students would be able to register for the course either with a General Education prefix and take it for General Education credit, or they can register with the departmental prefix and take it for major credit. A student may also register for a course to satisfy both General Education and the major. In either case, the student credit hours would be credited to the department of the faculty member teaching the course.
One of the many benefits of the proposed curriculum is that it creates much less rigid lines between general education and majors/minors. From the perspective of the general education requirements, there is no restriction on the number of courses a student may count toward both general education and the major.
If these courses are team designed, shouldn’t they also be team-taught?
Only Entry Year Experience courses and mid-career courses specify team design. If faculty designing these courses believe that team teaching is the best way to deliver the course and are willing and able to do it, then they may do so. The requirement is that the courses be designed by interdisciplinary groups of faculty and that each faculty member teach the equivalent of a section of the course (25 students) three times. How each faculty team works that out depends on the course and the group of people designing it. Currently, faculty teams have worked with a variety of models:
This list is illustrative, not exhaustive. As long as the course is delivered in a way which allows students to meet the learning objectives, and as long as USM has the space to accommodate particular course configurations, faculty teams can run the course however they want.
Can I join an existing EYE or MCE faculty team/course?
Yes. Faculty are free, upon mutual agreement between themselves and an existing faculty team, to join an existing course.
Will I be compensated differently if I join an existing course?
Faculty who join an existing EYE or Mid-Career course will receive a $500 stipend.
Can faculty wind up being forced to teach a course that has been designed by others?
No. Faculty are free, upon mutual agreement between themselves and an existing faculty team, to join an existing course. Faculty are also free not to teach.
Also, it will be an on-going matter for departments to decide how best and at what level their faculty can and will participate. If the Department decides to construct its own General Education courses—for example, Capstone courses or second level courses—then faculty may be governed by whatever departmental curricular or workload policies apply to these and any other departmental courses.
Will Faculty be forced to teach courses with Professional Staff? What exactly is meant by “Teaching Community” in the description of the EYE courses?
Faculty will not be forced to teach courses with anyone. In the case of the teaching communities referred to in the design and instruction of EYE courses, there is no expectation or requirement that anyone other than faculty will teach the courses. The teaching communities are encouraged and described in detail so that faculty might make use of the variety of instructional resources available to them to help students achieve the learning objectives of EYE courses, especially those with which some of us have limited experience. Examples of how current pilot faculty have collaborated with non-faculty instructional partners include:
This list is illustrative, not prescriptive. Faculty are free to utilize their many possible instructional supports and partners in any way they wish.
What review procedures exist for these courses?
This year, members of the GECPG are reviewing proposals. By the end of Spring 2007, GECPG will propose a permanent administrative structure. Course approval will happen in a fashion similar to current core curriculum classes. Faculty committees in the “Gen Ed Pathway” (we still lack a final name) administration will coach faculty teams on their initial proposals. The home departments of the faculty proposing the course should also review course proposals. Final approval would rest with the General Education Council, which is a committee of the USM Faculty Senate. (Note: the Core Council is now a subcommittee of the GEC.)
Who designs the student evaluation tool? Who evaluates the course?
The GECPG is developing an assessment plan that will likely include the collection of course evaluation data. This will serve a distinct purpose from faculty peer review. Review of the course as part of the program will be a regular part of assessing the success of the new Gen Ed Pathway. Courses and other components of the curriculum will be reviewed every two years.
How does this relate to a department’s peer review of faculty?
Regular course evaluations will be collected in gen ed courses and will reside in the faculty’s home departments.
Is a letter from an evaluative group going to be given to the peer review committee of an EYE instructor? Will AFUM allow an evaluative committee outside of the department to play a role in the peer review process of an EYE instructor?
No, no, and no.
Will there be a General Education committee to handle grade challenges for these new courses?
Student complaints about grades will be handled according to University policy as stated in the Undergraduate Catalogue (p. 37 of the 2005-2006 edition).
If you are having problems with this page, contact ehawkins@usm.maine.edu