Charge: The SSIS Curriculum Committee consists of five faculty members elected for staggered three year terms by vote of the College faculty (see membership information below). Additionally, the Associate Dean attends Committee meetings and serves in an advisory capacity.
The Committee is charged with reviewing course and program proposals (e.g., establishing a new undergraduate major, modifying an existing major, establishing a new graduate level certificate) initiated within the College. The Committee conducts its appraisals in accordance with the University Policy Manual. Items approved by the Committee are subject to father review by the Faculty Senate's Curriculum Subcommittee and generally must be posted to the Academic Affairs website. Additionally, new program proposals must also go before the full Faculty Senate (although generally on the "consent calendar"). The President has ultimate authority to approve course/program proposals. However, this responsibility may be delegated to Academic Affairs.
Traditionally the SSIS Curriculum Committee has focused on three main goals in considering course and program proposals. First, the Committee has attempted to ensure that adequate consultation has occurred when a proposal crosses disciplinary boundaries, in accordance with the Faculty Council's "Guidelines for Consultation and Dispute Resolution Regarding New Course Proposals" (see link below). In an effort to promote consultation, the Committee has required that proposals be posted on the Committee's list serve (overseen by Heather Mummaw), required that new course proposals include the Course Approval Information Form (see link below), and required that written documentation of the correspondence of the consultation is submitted with new course proposals. Second, the Committee has made an effort to ensure that proposals meet common, minimal academic norms. For example, new course proposals are expected to include a draft syllabus that meets widely shared standards. Third, the Committee has attempted to promote adherence to University norms for proposal presentation, such as specifying prerequisites, detailing learning objectives, and indicating how such objectives are linked to methods of evaluating students. The Committee works hard to ensure accuracy as much of the information contained on Course and Program Proposals (Forms A and B) serves as catalog copy in print and on-line, and thus is binding for the University and students.
In general the Committee has attempted to resolve concerns through consultation and discussion, recognizing that academic units have primary responsibility for determining the content of their programs. It is common for the Committee to work informally with departments to ensure that proposals are acceptable.
|Brian DiSarro||Government||Fall 2014 - Spring 2017||Office: TAH 3115
|Mical Shilts||Family & Consumer Sciences||Fall 2014 - Spring 2017||Office: MRP 3033
|Sharon Furtak||Psychology||Fall 2013 - Spring 2016||Office: AMD 357A
|Sujatha Moni, Chair||Women's Studies||Fall 2013 - Spring 2016||Office: AMD 560B
|Liam Murphy||Anthropology||Fall 2014 - Spring 2017||Office: MND 4022
|Dianne Hyson, Ex-officio||Dean's Office||N/A||Office: AMD 258
|Heather Mummaw, Administrative Support||Dean's Office||N/A||Office: AMD 255
Course & Program Proposal Forms (Form A & Form B)
Curriculum Dispute Policy
SSIS Course & Program Submission Checklist
SSIS Course Approval Info Form - best used in Internet Explorer or Google Chrome
Example of Completed Form A
Instructions for posting to the listserv