Committees and Special Task Forces -  Credit Committee, 2005-2006

History of Committee Formation:

At the October 20, 2005 University Faculty Meeting the following motion was made to create an ad hoc committee to develop a proposal on course credit and requirements for graduation:

WHEREAS the Task Force on Undergraduate Education (TFUGE) was charged with the task of considering the continuing appropriateness of credit hours allocated to courses and for the review of the number of hours/courses needed for graduation; and

WHEREAS a subcommittee was duly formed for that purpose (among others), who duly reported to the TFUGE Steering Committee; and

WHEREAS after considerable discussion and debate within subcommittee, Steering Committee, and the general faculty, no suitable resolution was attained;

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the Provost be requested to appoint a Special Committee charged with bringing before the faculty by the end of the 2005-2006 academic year a proposal concerning course credit hours and graduation requirements; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there be a moratorium on departments or schools changing their basic system of course credit, either from three hours per course to four hours per course, or from four hours to three hours, and that this moratorium should last until these matters be resolved, or until the faculty votes to rescind such moratorium.

Comment: The moratorium applies only to wholesale changes in course credits by departments, programs and schools. Individual professors may present courses for approval to the appropriate governing committee with justification for the number of credit hours stipulated.

Voted amendment: The moratorium shall apply also to the TFUGE curriculum proposal, which shall not stipulate the credit assigned to general education courses until the issues of credit hours is resolved or until such time as the moratorium is lifted.

Provost's Charge:

In the spirit of the motion, the committee shall develop a proposal for stipulating a practical and uniform standard for course credit, and a proposal for total credits/courses required for degrees. The following issues are examples of those that should be considered:

1. SACS requirements, which include a system of course credit that is related to assessment of learning outcomes resulting from the course requirements.
2. AASCB requirements for undergraduate business degrees.
3. Course credit and degree criteria in place at other comparable institutions (ACS survey is available).
4. Understanding of the extent and reasoning for variable credit among existing courses at Richmond.
5. Consult with the Registrar on implementation of any proposal with respect to registration, records, transcripts, etc.
6. Consult with Deans on practical logistics of implementing systems that are considered for adoption, including implications for staffing, teaching loads, and the like.
7. Consultation as needed with students, academic departments, councils, and/or school faculties to gain opinions and ideas as information to be used in developing a proposal.
8. Appreciation of the variations in pedagogy among disciplines - such as science laboratories, creative art projects, independent projects, major papers vs. many writing assignments, amount of reading, scheduled consultation and supervision outside of class meeting times, and so on as these might relate to criteria proposed for standard credit
9. The relation of course credit to the number of hours and courses required for all of the degrees available in each of the three full-time undergraduate schools.
10. Criteria which might allow the same course to qualify for either undergraduate or graduate credit.
11. In addition, the final recommendation(s) should take into account:
    A. Impact on study abroad.
    B. Impact on student-athletes.
    C. Impact on competitive admissions.
    D. Impact on courses cross-listed among our five schools.
    E. Impact on transfer credits and for credits gained through SCS courses.
    F. A practical process for determining the appropriate amount of credit for specific courses and educational activities proposed for academic credit in the future.

The committee is charged to develop:

• a proposal for stipulating practical and uniform criteria for determining course credit, and
• a proposal for total credits and courses required for degrees.

The report should explain briefly the pros and cons of important options that may have been considered in arriving at the committee's final recommendation.

The report should include some examples of four year schedules for representative majors in each school that illustrate how students typically would fulfill the requirements for degrees.

The Committee should recommend a process by which new courses should be reviewed for compliance with whatever standards are adopted, and a recommendation as to whether all existing courses should be similarly reviewed and changed if they do not comply with the new standards.

The report should be ready for formal faculty discussion by mid-March of 2006.

Reference Documents:
Report of TFUGE Subcommittee on Credit, Calendar and Assessment

Membership:

Approved by Committee on Committees

Scott Allison – Psychology
April Hill – Biology
David Leary, University Professor
Erling Sjovold – Art
Doug Hicks – Jepson School
Joe Ben Hoyle – Accounting
Valaria Vendrzyk – Accounting

Documents:

Committee's Cover Memo for Final Report, April 2006
Committee's Final Report, April 2006
Committee's REVISED Cover Memo for Final Report, May 2006
Committee's REVISED Final Report, May 2006
Recommendations with Amendments as Voted by the University Faculty, May 15, 2006