Strategic Goal #2
To review and revise the undergraduate student experience in General Education and related Co-Curricular programs

1. Verify need for GE review

• It was determined that we needed to review our GE program for the following reasons:
  • It had been more than ten years since the last GE review and national GE practices and pedagogy have changed.
  • The total number units required for the general education program and most academic majors, leaves students with very little room to take “elective” classes, this has been seen as undesirable by the faculty.  Depending on which options are selected GE is between 60 and 71 units, and undergraduate majors range between 28 and 77 non-GE units with a median of 47 (see Units for Undergraduate Majors).  This leaves very little space for minors or electives in a 128 unit undergraduate degree.
  • Because students can take most of the courses in the GE program in any order, it has been impossible to make clear linkage between courses. Thus it has been difficult to develop complex thinking and communication skills in a focused, programmatic way. The same is true of some of the values and attitudes (i.e. openness to diversity) that PLNU hopes to build into its students.

2. Discussion – What basic principles of purpose and administration should characterize the PLNU General Education program

• In the fall of 2004 the GE Task Force was formed.  This representative group was given the responsibility for evaluating our current GE program and making recommendations for the future.  For a summary of their work see Summary of Faculty Work from August 17, 2004.
• Also in the fall of 2004, the WASC CPR Group Two: Educational Effectiveness Indicators Committee was formed.  This group was tasked with developing a list of general learning outcomes for the undergraduate program and the tools to assess these outcomes.
• The work of these two groups is interconnected and both teams were chaired by the same individual.
• Both committees worked to gather faculty input via e-mail, the fall faculty workshop and in faculty meetings (see Initial Email Questionnaire Results and Faculty Meeting Voting plus the WASC CPR Group Two Report).
• The committee also spoke to students (see General Education Task Force Student Written Response Form and General Education Task Force Student Group Oral Interview Responses).

3. Review and consider national GE trends

• The GE Task Force read a collection of documents related to current philosophy and practice in General Education. These documents formed the basis for some of the philosophical conversations related to GE (see the reading list in Research Tools).
• The GE Task Force also examined a diverse collection of GE programs from a wide variety of schools (the list of schools can be found in Research Tools).
• GE Task Force also looked at several paradigms for revising GE.

4. Determine Goals and Objectives for GE

• In the August 17, 2004 Faculty Workshop a set of general learning outcomes was discussed (see Summary of Faculty Work from August 17, 2004).
• The WASC CPR committee refined the learning outcomes and presented them to the faculty on September 22, 2004 (see General Learning Outcomes).
• The faculty were surveyed about core values for GE.  There were some clear results (see see Initial Email Questionnaire Results, Faculty Meeting Voting and General Education Task Force Minutes May 2, 2005). 
• A list of key ideas to be considered for implementation in the GE program was developed by the GE Task Force as the result of their reading and research (described in the answer to question 6 below).  These principles are part of what is guiding the current discussion related to proposing a modified GE program (see Research Tools).
• The WASC CPR Group Two Report has some specific recommendations related to GE (see the Recommendations section). 
• The GE Task force is still at work on a PLNU statement of GE philosophy and the associated goals.

5. Determine assessment measures

• After a series of revisions, a final list of Educational Effectiveness Indicators (EEI’s) was created.  Once this was completed, a list of instruments for measuring these 13 EEI’s was developed (see General Education Capstone Exam).
• The assessment measures consist of a collection of three General Education Exams and some information gathered from student surveying.
• As of this date two of the three GE exams have been piloted and the third will be pilot tested in the spring of 2006.  Information about the exams can be found in Appendices 8-12 of the WASC CPR Group Two Report.

6. Analyze GE review process – esp. in relation to level of faculty involvement, determining impact on departments, faculty loads, and student enrollment patterns and transfers.

• The GE Task Force is still working on the details of a proposed GE program and will do the needed analysis once the details are further along.
• The GE Task Force is also designing a system for broader faculty involvement in the development of various portions of the GE curriculum.

Supporting Documents:
WASC CPR Group Two Report