Innovations of other peer institutions

Curricular innovations

Team-teaching and collaborative teaching opportunities

Cross-disciplinary courses

Foreign study or off-campus study for all students; internships, independent study credit, GNED sponsorship, consistency across different experiences; variety of different formats in internships; honors theses requirements

As you are all aware the University Curriculum Council is reviewing the present curriculum to determine whether revisions need to be made. Task Force #7 has been charged with evaluating the atmosphere for innovation as it exists or doesn't exist in our academic environment. In order to complete our task we are conducting an in-house survey, and therefore request from each department the following information:

1. 
Would the chair please summarize for us any innovative directions the department derived from its recent self-study?

2. 
Would you please place us on the agenda of your next departmental meeting? We propose to discuss the following questions:

a. What innovative, interdisciplinary, non-traditional approaches and programs do you and/or your department already practice? 

b. What innovations would you and/or your department and/or the University like to try? 

c. What other universities are doing the kinds of things you or your department would like to try? [This question will help us direct our out-of-house research.] 

d. What structural changes (i.e. redefining "course load" or faculty work) would promote innovation? 

e. What major academic activities beyond the normal teaching and advising (such as running an interdisciplinary program) engage your time or engage faculty time for which you receive no compensation such as release time or financial compensation?

Please distribute these questions to your department before the meeting. Someone from the task force will be present to [answer questions if at all possible. However, if our schedules do not allow for our attendance, we ask that you appoint a "point person" to take notes or collect these questionnaires for the purpose of meeting later with the task force. We would like to meet with small groups of point people to begin to evaluate this information.

Please understand that your input is crucial to our investigation, and we are grateful for any help you can provide. When we have been placed on the agenda for your meeting, please contact the chair of our task force.

UCC7-Feb. 2 report

The members of our Task Force have been Stephen Field, Tom Gardner, Tucker Gibson, Bob Jensen, Nanette LeCoate, Bill McCaughrin, Mary Ellen Ross, David Spener, and Dan Walz.  The Task Force 7 Chair is Judith Fisher.

Our original charge was, to quote Bob Jensen, more of a list of topics than a mission. We were asked to look at innovations of other peer institutions, look at requiring some kind of foreign study or off-campus study for all students; increasing the variety of internships, independent study credit, GNED sponsorships, consistency across different disciplines.  This somewhat amorphous list has meant that our task force has overlapped with most of the other task forces.  This overlap continued in our activities last fall.  Given the new focus of data-collection deriving from the UCC meeting last September, we directed our efforts toward in-house data collection.  We sent a questionnaire to all departments asking faculty to consider three large questions:  What innovations (departures from traditional classroom structure) do you as a faculty member and as a department practice?  What innovations would you like to see?  What are the impediments to innovations from your perspective.

We have received information from eleven departments:  Biology, Business Administration, Chemistry, Classical Studies, Computer Science, Economics, Engineering, English, Geosciences, Religion, and Sociology and Anthropology

Our Task Force now has a website that contains the individual departmental reports, our committee membership and charge, and a summary-analysis of the results of our data collection.  The address is http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/ucc7/survey01.htm.    When you check the website, please understand that the summary of our results is necessarily simplified from the individual departmental reports.  Please read the summary of each department in the context of the department’s entire report.  Both are available on the website.

Our Task Force was impressed by the number and variety of innovations already practiced by all the responding departments.  Since that is available electronically, I will concentrate today on the kinds of innovations you have told us you would like to see and the impediments to those innovations.  We have derived four large categories to organize the eleven departmental responses.  However, these classes are based upon false distinctions.  Our university works through a triangle of interests:  administration and staff, faculty, and students.  These interests overlap (and sometimes compete), so in order to begin organizing our data, we have had to categorize our findings by emphasizing one angle of the triangle at the expense of the others.  Choosing one emphasis does not mean that we ignored or were unaware of the other interests.  In the following summary I will list some general interests and concerns generated by our questionnaire.  This report is certainly not exhaustive—for a more complete and more detailed picture of the faculty’s interests in innovation, I refer you to our website.

By far the greatest interests and concerns centered around what can be generally described as flexibility.  Most departments would like to see more flexible definitions of faculty work-load such as release time to administer interdisciplinary programs, run internship programs, and to develop courses.  But departments would also like more flexibility in actual course structures, more 75 minute periods, more 1 to 2 credit courses, and non-traditional courses such as asynchronous courses for full-time, on-campus students. 

Second in importance was an increase in University Resources to imporve the infrastructure and to make better use of intellectual resources of the talents and experience of our faculty.  Several departments wanted to see more electronic classrooms, especially ones with a computer, projector, and screen.  The training and physical space for teleconferencing could widen the University’s educational resources as could acquiring resources for technology training, such as eCollege, CyberClass, Unext, Pensare, and Blackboard.  Some of this, if not all, could be organized and administered through an office of Instructional Innovation and Development.

Of course, the desire for increased resources and more interdisciplinary faculty work would certainly affect our students, but we received some responses that seemed directly oriented toward students.  For example, in our discussion of different curricular models, could we consider implementing experiential learning across the curriculum, or as part of the first-year seminar program? Can we increase the number of internships for our students?  Can we increase faculty and student exchanges and study abroad?  Might it not make more sense to switch from a common curriculum to a core curriculum?  None of these questions can be answered in isolation; they seem to argue for flexibility in defining student work-load as well as faculty.  But they seem to argue for a greater connection between Trinity students and the community, or the world beyond the red-brick buildings.  So, too, specialized programs such as a Latin American studies certificate, perhaps requiring some study abroad would help our students see themselves as citizens as well as students.

Finally, we as most of the task forces, received input about changing our academic calendar to a winter-term schedule or a four course load.  But these requests overlap with much of what will go on in the interest groups this afternoon and I see no need to dwell on them. 

Based on our findings and the other reports, the next step for our task force I see is to integrate our findings with the interest break-out groups.  Instead of specific proposals coming from our committee, we need to take our information where it will be most useful.  Judging from the schedule you have in front of you today, I think “innovations” is no longer a generic issue, but applies to specific approaches to specific problems.  Our question is now:  How can innovations (and what kinds of innovations) in faculty work, the nature and structure of  our curriculum, and student learning combine with existing practices to create the kind of education we are here today to talk about? 

Trinity University Curriculum Council Task Force 7

Summary of Departmental Discussions Concerning Innovation

Innovations We Have Put Into Practice

 1. Economics

a)      Economists in the schools

b)      Faculty exchange with Monterrey Tech

c)      Economics field trip to Mexico in the spring

2. English

a)      Humanities 1600

b)      Women’s Studies Program

c)      Linguistics Program

d)      Medieval and Renaissance Studies Program

3. Business Administration

a)      Non-domestic internship

b)      Student Managed Fund

c)      Academic exchange with Monterrey Tech

d)      E-Commerce Program

e)      Graduate accounting program

f)        International Management project that analyzes a multinational company

g)      Internships programs

h)      Lecture series in International Management

i)        Toolkit Project

j)        Real-world marketing and statistical research projects

k)      Interdisciplinary minor

l)        Legal studies minor

m)    Student web pages as course requirement

n)      Additional foreign language requirement for International Business major

4. Classical Studies

Interdisciplinary courses are the rule rather than the exception in Classical Studies, where there are some dozen courses that count for other degree programs such as History, Art History, Anthropology, Speech and Drama, Women’s Studies, Medieval and Renaissance Studies, and Comparative Literature. In addition, another dozen courses in other departments (History, Art History) are regularly offered by Classical Studies professors.

5. Religion

a)      General Education course on Religion and Science

b)      Exit interview for seniors (majors)

c)      Summary of departmental accomplishments

d)      Off-campus departmental retreats

6. Biology

Senior comprehensive exam

7. Computer Science

a)      Undergraduate research leader nationally

b)      Web site course materials for 7 years

c)      P/E/D Seminar for all sophomore, junior and senior students provides structured design philosophy early

d)      Senior capstone course producing real-world experience in software development

e)      Administering campus-wide computer skills exam

f)        Developed a network of companies for student scholarships and internships

8. Chemistry

Undergraduate research, one of the country’s largest programs

9. Sociology and Anthropology

a)      Field trips as an integral part of the curriculum

b)      General Social Survey database

c)      Award-winning web site

d)      Web development as a teaching tool

e)      Faculty-student collaborative research

f)        Archeological field school in the Yucatan

g)      Credit for service-learning projects

h)      Three Languages Across the Curriculum courses

i)        Courses in American Intercultural Studies, Women’s Studies, International Studies, Environmental Studies

10. Modern Languages & Literatures

a)   Students may take computer-based proficiency exams in most of the department’s languages.

b)   Many of the department’s faculty teach Languages Across the Curriculum courses, including those in Spanish, French, Russian, and Chinese.

c)  The dept. received a grant for technology training which funded two years of web-authoring workshops. As a result all dept. faculty have at least minimal expertise, and a handful are very proficient at using the Internet for teaching. For example, Intro to Spanish Literature is an online course; and Spanish 1402 uses CLS 344 where they conduct exercises and explore the web in Spanish.

Innovations We Would Like to See

A.     Faculty flexibility and support in time and money for developing flexibility

1.      Release time for course development, program administration, etc.

2.      Support for development of learning materials

3.      Support for non-traditional courses such as asynchronous courses for full-time, on-campus students

4.      More options for 75 minute classes

5.      “Modular” 1-2 credit courses

6.      Institutionalized team teaching

7.      Expansion of the Languages Across the Curriculum Program

8.      Quantitative and informational literacy across the curriculum

B.     University Resources of capital investment, improvements in infrastructure, and intellectual resources of the talents and experience of our faculty

1.      More electronic classrooms, especially ones with computer, projector and screen

2.      Resources for technology training, such as eCollege, CyberClass, Unext, Pensare, Blackboard

3.      Establish an Office of Instructional Innovation and Development

4.      “Modular Tables” that can be broken up into separate desks

5.      Teleconferencing with other institutions and organizations

C.     Student-oriented curricular issues

1.      Expand internship opportunities in economics

2.      Service or experiential learning across the curriculum, or as part of the 1^st-year Seminar

3.      A core curriculum instead of a common curriculum

4.      More faculty exchange and study abroad

5.      More institutionalized internships

6.      In-house faculty-student collaborative applied social research unit

D.     Academic calendar

1. Four course load supported by Religion department
2. Winter term, or mini-semester in May
3. Intensive courses involving winter or spring inter-session travel

Impediments to Innovation

 A.     Faculty flexibility and support in time and money for developing flexibility

1. Team teaching as an overload
2. Faculty load (total teaching load) must interface with curricular load (full-time student load)
3. Course load suggestions:

a)      Take a year or two average

b)      Let departments set their own loads

c)      Load credit for team-taught or multi-disciplinary courses

d)      Load credit for supervising student research

4. Field classes:

a)      Time equivalency for field and lecture classes

b)      Flexibility in scheduling

5. Leaves without adequate replacement
6. Need more support in time and resources for developing learning materials; should create a Center for Teaching and Learning
7. Lack of time because:

a)      Too much time required for instrumentation

b)      Too much time spent with students doing research

8. No procedure for team-teaching
9. No compensation for:

a)      New course development

b)      Preparation of seniors for graduate and professional schools

c)      Letters of recommendation

d)      Assisting students with applications for scholarships, internships, etc. (e.g., Fulbright scholarships)

e)      No sick leave coverage

B.     University resources of capital investment, improvements in infrastructure, and intellectual resources of the talents and experience of our faculty

1. Inadequate resources: library, computing center, technology
2. More IT staff
3. Classroom size: need 200-seat lecture hall that breaks into 20-seat labs
4. No technology training, and insufficient technical assistance
5. No grant support
6. Inadequate staffing
7. Poor classrooms

 C.     Student-oriented curricular issues

1. Little support for interdisciplinary courses
2. The campus is too compartmentalized. Literature in English translation should be taught in the English dept. Film courses could also be taught in the communication dept.

D.     Academic calendar

1.      4 - 4 course load makes curriculum less flexible which would force the Chemistry department to scale back present offerings

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Business Administration

Submitted by Thomas W. Gardner
Imogene and Harold D. Herndon Professor Geology

Report submitted for both Biology and Geology

November 22, 1999

Task Force Seven, I had the opportunity to visit with the Geology and Biology departments (Friday) during meetings that discussed our questions. I'll send this to everyone on our taskforce by this email, otherwise we wouldn't have it before our meeting tomorrow. Here are some of the comments.

1. There was a loud and consistent plea to address the course load issue. Nearly everybody voiced the opinion the course load bean counting is a MAJOR stumbling block to innovation at Trinity. Suggested improvements ranged from "Take a year or two year average for load accounting" to let the departments set their own loads and give them the flexibility to distribute load as they see fit. Along those lines discussions quickly moved to "What constitutes course load". In the sciences thesis research/independent study consumes large amounts of time, but is not counted toward load. Also discussed frequently were ideas for team-taught or multi-disciplinary courses and load credit given for them.

2. Resources and their allocation were also high on the innovation list. Conversations in both departments involved the library, the computing center and technology as limits to innovation at Trinity. This may be especially an issue for the sciences, but I think not. We need more and better information technology people on the staff.

3. The ability and easy of getting students into the field seems to be a serious limitation to innovation for both geology and biology. The discussions addressed issues of schedules for all day "field classes", time equivalancey for field and lecture courses, and flexibility in scheduling.

4. More student driven research for which supervising faculty get load credit.

5. The electronic classroom and more technology ready classrooms.

6. Fiscal Affairs makes too many discussions that affect Academic Affairs, limiting innovation.

7. Class room size seems to limit innovation. Example, we need lecture halls that hold ~200 people for a plenary lecture that then breaks into labs with 20 students each.

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Business Administration

Submitted by Bob Jensen

November 17, 1999

In addition to those innovations listed in Dr. Burr’s October 26 memorandum sent to Task Force #7, I will add some of the innovations mentioned in our departmental meeting on November 12, 1999.  I will also add some of my own ideas since the questionnaire also asks for individual opinions.

I.  What innovative, interdisciplinary, non-traditional approaches and programs do you already practice?

• Dr. Burr listed the following innovations in his October 26 memorandum:

1.      A revised International Business Concentration that requires a foreign language competency beyond the minimum Trinity University requirement, a study abroad element, and a non-domestic internship experience.

2.      A new Student Managed Fund course under Dr. Cooley in which students actively participate in investment decisions while working with a portion of the University’s endowment.

3.      The multidimensional program the Department has with Monterrey Tec (ITESM) which includes faculty exchanges, student exchanges, joint research projects among faculty, and joint class projects.

4.      The in-progress development of an E-Commerce program under the direction of our new faculty member named Dr. Bruce Reinig.

5.      Our relatively new graduate accounting program leading to a MS in Accounting.  This program is unusual for a University the size of Trinity University.  This entailed the development or special revision of 12 courses in accounting, business law, finance, business, conflict management, and marketing.

6.      The analysis of a multinational company as a project in International Management.  Student teams heavily use electronic communications.  An article about this project is expected to be forthcoming in the Journal of Teaching International Business.

• The following innovations were mentioned at the November 12 meeting of the Department:

7.      The new and revised internship programs of accounting students and business students.  The accounting student internship program (ACCT 4697 under Dr. Sandlin) combines a half-semester of full-time internship off campus with a half-semester of concentrated and newly designed courses.  The business administration internship (BUSN 3397 under Dr. Burr) entails credit for a single course while students intern in a variety of organizations.  The links to current students and their internships are given at http://www.trinity.edu/departments/business_admin/index.htm.

8.      The new “Department of Business Administration Lecture Series in International Management” for which a long-term commitment was made by the San Antonio World Affairs Council to support such a series.  This will give the Department access to outstanding speakers from all over the world and the World Affairs Council will take care of the logistics and the speaker’s fee

9.      The real-world marketing and statistical research projects by students in Marketing and Business Research under Dr. Jones.  Below is an incomplete list of some of the clients for which students have done research projects for over the years.  If you need more I can scour the volumes that I have in various boxes.  I think, however, these (below) should give anyone an idea as to our liberal arts connection.

     Witte Museum (for 10 - 15 years and at least one per year.
     Boy Scouts.
     San Antonio Museum of Art
     San Antonio Children's Museum
     YMCA
     Edwards Underground Water District
     American Cancer Society (San Antonio Chapter)
     Connections (an Incarnate Word sponsored retirement community)
     The Lighthouse (formerly Lighthouse for the Blind)

10.  The curriculum innovation of having an interdisciplinary minor in Communication Management that combines courses in mass media, speech communication, marketing, and business principles.

11.  The relatively new Minor in Business Administration Legal Studies.

12.  The cross listing of courses in business with economics (BUSN 3301/ECON 3320) and organization communication (BUSN 3311/SPCH 3362).

13.  The requiring of student web pages in BUSN 2311 under Dr. Jensen and Dr. Reinig.

14.  The web publishing of graduate student projects under Dr. Jensen for ACCT 5341.

II.  What innovations would you like the Department or University or yourself to try? 
What other universities are doing that we would like to consider (not necessarily try)?
What structural changes would promote motivation?
How to improve more rewards apart from traditional teaching, research, and service?

• We see a need for more support (time and resources) for innovative developments of learning materials.  This includes resources for technology training and technical assistance in materials development.  Since it is expensive to provide faculty with incentives and training for technology adaptations, the University might look into alternatives that require no special training.  For example, a corporation called eCollege now serves up course materials for over 50 courses at the University of Northern Arizona (UNA).  UNA faculty submit materials in most any form (hand-written pages, audio tapes, video tapes, etc.) and eCollege experts put these materials in a server maintained off-campus.  UNA students pay for access to those materials like they pay for an assigned textbook in a course.  CyberClass serves up course materials for over 100 universities.  Unext offers course materials for faculty at Stanford, Chicago, Columbia, and other prestige universities.  Pensare offers course materials from schools like Harvard and Duke.  To our knowledge, no faculty or administrators are even studying such alternatives for Trinity University.
  
  An on-campus alternative is to install an easy-to-use server shell comparable to what most universities now have in place.  One example is the Blackboard system that allows faculty with minimal technology skills to put learning materials online, manage electronic chat rooms, and serve up streaming audio and video.  The Blackboard web site is at http://company.blackboard.com/Bb/faqs.html.  Other alternatives are listed at http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/245soft1.htm.
  
  Apart from the alternatives above, faculty need more time and training for pedagogical innovations in general.  There should time relief, funding, travel funds, and other types of funding for this type of faculty development.  Consideration should be given to formation of an Office of Instructional Innovation and Development.  The majority of colleges and universities have an office of this type.
• A high priority need seems to be a program for innovative assistance in obtaining grant support.  The current University support system is geared to assisting science faculty.  The needs of business faculty are quite different. 
• We support Dr. Don Clark’s proposal to create a central support office for handling details of arranging for campus visitors such as visiting speakers in our classes.
• There was strong support for incentives and assistance in putting course materials on either LAN (on-campus) or international (WWW) networks.  Coupled with this are incentives and assistance for course innovations in general.  For example, there is presently little research credit given for case development projects even if the cases become published.  This reduces incentives to develop innovative cases for use in courses.
• We would like more latitude in experimenting with non-traditional courses such as asynchronous courses for full-time, on-campus students.  See the Sloan Foundation Experiments summarized at http://www.trinity.edu/rjensen/255wp.htm.
• We would like more time relief for the development of innovative course materials, courses, and even degree programs.  For example, we would like more options for course load reductions and more options for 75-minute classes that meet twice each week in place of 50-minute classes that meet three times each week.
• Professor Trotter replied as follows:

Please add the study abroad opportunities which we discussed, study in Mexico, Europe or the Far East lead by Trinity U. professors.

Also a suggestion I did not mention in the meeting a "Washington field trip" since the Clerk of the United States Supreme Court is a Trinity Alumni, we should have "access" to the Court that few enjoy. (Incidentally, from my last visit I understand that the "highest court in the land" is actually a Basketball Court above the Supreme Court chambers.)   I believe we could persuade the Clerkto allow us to organize a Study experience around a trip to the Court.

III.  What innovations have received special awards?

Professor Jensen’s approach to serving up text, audio, and video of experts on CD-ROMs, LAN networks, and the WWW was acknowledged in June 1999 in a joint program called the Toolkit Project funded jointly by the American Accounting Association and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  An interview and film crew arrived on campus to interview Bob Jensen and various administrators (Dr. White, Dr. Stefl, Ronnie Swanner, and Dr. Sandlin) and former students in Bob Jensen’s courses.  Dr. Burr would also have been interviewed if he had he not been out of the country at the time of the visitation.  These interviews are being put on a CD-ROM that will be distributed free to every higher education program around the world.

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Chemistry

October 28, 1999

1.  With regard to innovations it has already implemented, the Department is very proud of the central feature of its program -- the emphasis on undergraduate research.  It is one of the few departments on campus to require research of its majors and has one of the largest programs in the country in this area.  With regard to innovations it would like to put in place, Department members said they would very much like to teach interdisciplinary and team-taught courses.   Such courses have, in the past, been taught by departmental faculty ("The Origin of Life" course, for example.)  They would also like to be able to find the time to teach courses like the Human Quest or the First Year Seminar.  Department members regretted that such initiatives were difficult to pursue.  See below for reasons.

2.  When asked what other universities might provide a model for programs the department would like to initiate, the department emphatically stated that it was more concerned with negative models, that is, with universities that had 4-4 course loads.  The department was unamimous in stating that a four course load would make the curriculum much less flexible and rather than encouraging new iniatives, it would force the department to scale back even further its present offerings.

3.  When asked what "structural changes" would promote innovation, the department asked that the question be clarified.  I noted that we on Task Force #7 wanted faculty to consider a variety of possible options and not just a change in student course load.  Examples could be intercessions, 3-2 teaching loads, course reductions for course development or team-teaching etc.

Members of the Chemistry Department pointed out that their department is somewhat unusual in that it sponsors large summer research programs with 35 to 40 students per summer.   this program is usually supported by outside grants.  These grants do not always include a faculty salary or the salary taken from the grant is often less than that available for summer school teaching.

4.  Chemistry Department members felt that there were at least two major areas in which the expend considerable time and effort beyond the usual teachings and advising load.  These are: 1. time spent with students doing research and 2. time spent on instrumentation (the setting up and maintenance of machines and computers used for experimentatin).  The one electronic technician on the staff cannot maintain all the equipment regularly used and this obliges faculty to do much of their own setting up and maintenance.

In conclusion, the major perceived obstacles to innovation are lack of time and inadequate staffing.  As it now stands, the Chemistry Department finds it challenge enough to meet its own curricular requirements and those of the American Chemical Society let alone teach classes like the First Year Seminar.   Members of the Department seemed to feel that new, or more creative ways of accounting for faculty work loads might free them up to pursue interdisciplinary or team-taught efforts.

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Business Administration

Submitted by Collin M. Wells, Chair

October 28, 1999

Thank you for your memo dated October 24.  I have circulated it to all members of the Department and we have produced the following responses to your Question 2.  All were addressed in the Self-Study (question 1.)

Question 2:

a.  The program of the Department of Classical Studies at Trinity University was designed to be highly interdisciplinary.  The degree program includes courses from the departments of Classical Studies, Art History, History, Speech and Drama, Philosophy, Political Science, Religion, and Speech and Drama.   The only other department at the university that is as interdisciplinary in degree requirements is International Studies.

We are non-traditional in that we define Classical Studies to include Persia, Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the entire Mediterrean World.  Our specalities are focused on borders and boundary areas: Roman frontiers, Turkey and the East, Egypt during the Hellenistic Period, Late Antiquity, the Byzantine Era (to the twelfth centurty A.D.), etc.   Our fields of specialization include literature (poetry, drama, epic, prose fiction, etc.), cultural studies, art history, history, archaeology, gender studies, etc.

Because of these wise-ranging and interdisiplinary interests, professors in our Department have been able to create and design courses that count for the degree programs of not only Classical Studies but also History, Art History, Anthropology, Speech and Drama, Women's Studies, Medieval and Renaissance Studies, and Comparative Literature.  These course include the following:
          The Ancient Romance and Novel (Classical Studies, Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Women Studies,
          and Comparative Literature),
          Greek and Roman Drama (cross-listed in Drama and Classical Studies; also included in Women's Studies
          and Comparative LIterature),
          Gender and Identity in the Ancient World (Classical Studies, Women's Studies, and Comparative Literature)
          Greek and Roman Epic (Classical Studies, Comparative Literature),
          Greek Literature in Translation (Classical Studies, Comparative Literature),
          Latin Literature in Translation (Classical Studies, Comparative Literature),
          Introduction to Classical Archaeology (cross-listed in Anthropology and Classical Studies),
          Classical Mythology (Classical Studies, Comparative Literature),
          Readings in the New Testament (Classical Studies, Medieval and Renaissance Studies),
          Archaeological Practicum (Classical Studies, Anthropology).

In the Department of History, the following courses are regularly offered by our professors (Dr. Colin Wells and Dr. Jaon Burton -- Greek History) and count for both History and Classical Studies:
          Ancient Greece and Rome,
          Archiac and Classical Greece,
          The Mediterranean World in the Hellenistic Age,
          The Roman Empire,
          Women and Family in Roman Law and Society,
          The Roman Army and Frontiers,
          North Africa from Rom to Islam.

In the Department of Art History, the following courses are regularly offered by one of our professors (Dr. Mark Garrison) and count for both Art Historty and Classical Studies:
          The Minoan-Mycenaen Civilization,
          Greek Vase Painting,
          Greek Architecture,
          Roman Art and Architecture,
          and Art and Archaeology of Mesopotamia and Persia.

As a discipline, classical studies and Mediterranean archaeology have traditionally taken a leading role in the use of information technology, and Garrison currently not only makes great use of internet resources in his teaching but is also exploring ways in which the web be used to expand the manner in which we collect, analyze, publish and teach archaeological data.

b.  We should like to offer a great many other innovative and interdisciplinary courses, such as a course on the use of classical themes and mythology in later world literature and visual art, a cross-cultural (and transhistorical) course on teh Trojan War in art and literature, etc.  Professors in our Department are interested in the possibility of team-teaching with professors from other disciplines and in developing more courses that supplement and enrich other departments' programs and the humanities program in general.  Several of us have wanted ever since we came to Trinity to be able to participate in first-year seminar programs, etc., if we could be spared from teh Department's own teaching obligations.

c.  The main structural change that would encourage furtehr innovatin in our department would be the addition of a fifth faculty member.  Our current size of four is not even adequate to cover our current responsibilities which include a full range of language courses in addition to the courses in culture, history, etc., essential to a respectable degree program in Classical Studies.  Leaves without adequate replacement decimate our program, but are, of course, crucial for maintaining the excellence, innovation, etc., of our teaching faculty.  Without a fifth person, we should be in a still worse position if ever the four-course proposal now being discussed in the Curriculum Council task forces were ever adopted, especially if it led to an all-round reduction in teaching loads.

d.  One of our faculty members (Dr. Joan Burton) co-founded the new interdisciplinary program of Comparative Literature, a massive commitment of time, and currently chairs that program.  This work was and is being done with no release time or financial compensation.  A member of our faculty is also currently on the board of Women's Studies (Dr. Joan Burton).  We also frequently develop new courses (with no compensation).  We have no plans to hold a departmental meeting in the near future, and we feel that this memo says all that needs to be said.  If you or your committe wish to discuss it further, I suggest you address yourself to me or to Joan Burton, my successor-designate, or to Mark Garrison, our computer coordinator.

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Computer Science

Submitted by Gerald Pitts

November 3, 1999

Dr. Gerald PItts was appointed the "point person" to dicuss our ideas with the task force.  Please contact him for dicussion of your second question.

Question 1 (department summer of innovative directions) is addressed below in an itemized outline form:

1)  Undergraduate research leader nationally

2)  Web site course materials for close to seven years on our own web site.

3)  Our P/E/D Seminar for all sophomore, junior and senior students, provides structured design philosophy early.

4)  Our senior capstone series produces real-world experience in complex software development.

5)  Administering the Computer Skills requirement and testing has been very and successful by SACS standards and been a model for other small universities.

6)  The department has developed a network of major CO's that provide scholarships and internships to students.

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Economics

November 10, 1999

The department voiced a general concern that there should be space to innovate for people who have the creativity to innovate and that such academic entrepreneurship should be rewarded. Innovations should be possible on a personal, departmental, and institutional level.

1. Innovative programs.

a. Economists in the schools. The Department sends Trinity students into elementary and secondary schools to enrich the teaching of economics. This program started as a volunteer program but is now a one-hour course. They develop original lesson plans that they rehearse with the coordinating faculty member. Trinity students learn how to vivify their academic major by teaching it and develop their own creativity.

b. One faculty member teaches in the Languages Across the Curriculum program.

c. The Department has helped organize a faculty exchange between the Monterrey Tec and Trinity. The participating faculty spend one week at the host institution teaching classes, meeting faculty, discussing possible research projects, meeting students, etc. Up to now, all the participants in this exchange have been members of the Division of Behavioral and Administrative Studies.

d. The Department has helped organize a student exchange between the Monterrey Tec and Trinity. Students from both institutions have been participating in this exchange program every year.

e. The Department has participated in the planning of a workshop for early next semester in which Trinity faculty will go to Mexico to learn about case writing. We expect that some of the participating faculty will use this knowledge to co-author case studies of Mexican firms with Tec faculty.

f. Every spring a faculty member in the Department takes approximately ten students to Mexico to attend a conference on economics and/or international business.

2. Innovations in place which could be expanded.

a. The department would like to expand its internship opportunities. Right now the faculty who run this program do so as an overload.

b. As a one-time project, Trinity students worked on a special problem for a San Antonio public official. Could such a project be expanded into an ongoing experience as a one or two hour course?

c. Electronic classrooms. The department would like to see more electronic classrooms that are less elaborately equipped. Classrooms equipped with a computer, projector, and screen would allow faculty to more fully integrate the computer and the internet into their classes. Often faculty want to use the computer for five or ten minutes and to have IMS set the equipment up becomes counterproductive in terms of class time.

3. Innovations the department might be interested in.

a. Interdisciplinary course offerings analogous to the First Year Seminar in Science and Religion.

b. Team teaching.

c. Service learning across the curriculum. For example, a student might be able to opt for an extra hour in an economics course and fulfill that hour in a community service capacity.

d. Service learning as part of the first year seminar.

4. Impediments to Innovation

Release Time:

a. Four of the programs already part of the department (Economists in the Schools, the internship program, Languages Across the Curriculum, and Monterrey Tec initiatives) are hindered in their development because of the faculty time required to coordinate, oversee, and evaluate student work. In some cases (Economists in the Schools and Languages Across the Curriculum) the department has solved this problem by having each one-hour overload per semester add up to three hours in three semesters, qualifying the faculty member for a reduced course load in the fourth. However, the more students in these programs, the greater the demand on faculty time.

b. Team teaching as an overload is not a feasible project, given the other demands on faculty time.

Overall, however, even release time must be measured against the other, more traditional needs of the department. Every course given to one effort (release time for running programs or internships, teaching in languages across the curriculum) must be balanced against the needs of the economics courses and the needs of 100 to 120 majors.

The Department also thinks the four-course load would impede innovation. Reducing the number of courses students take during their four years, and "packaging" knowledge with a "course" (as opposed to a "semester hour") as the basic unit would inhibit innovation significantly. Most our innovations (such as the one-hour economists in the school program that accumulates a one-course release for the faculty member as compensation) are in a less-than-one-course size. Furthermore, since requirements for specific majors are unlikely to decline in the same proportion as the total number of courses needed for graduation, students are likely to find less flexibility in their schedule to add elective courses. Since most innovative programs are electives, we expect lower demand for them.

Report of Interview with the Department of English
for UCC Task Force Seven

November 17, 1999

The basic position of the Department was that thinking about curricular innovations had to be integrated with discussions of course load for both faculty and students. The faculty load (what constitutes a total teaching load) must be interfaced with the curricular load (what constitutes full-time student load). This reciprocity should result in a policy allowing for flexibility.

The faculty also was concerned to identify and distinguish between curricular innovation and faculty service. Curricular innovation is directed at students. Courses such as the Humanities 1600, which the Department shared in developing, English 2311, Literary Methods and interdisciplinary courses such as English 3330, Literature and the Visual Arts, are current curricular innovations. The Department also administers the Women’s Studies Program, the Linguistics Program, the Medieval and Renaissance Studies Program, and Humanities 1600. This administrative work exemplifies faculty service that facilitates curricular innovation.

The primary structural change that would encourage both curricular and service innovation would be a policy redefining faculty work to allow for release time for course development, program administration, and programs such as internships. As in other departments, such work is currently an overload.

Experiential learning: faculty members have integrated experiential learning into their First Year Seminars. ESL students tutor once a week as part of their course work. However, much of the Department’s curriculum and methodology does not lend itself to experiential learning.

The Department would be interested in developing more interdisciplinary courses and genuine team-taught courses, but the faculty feels that balancing existing general education courses (Huma 1600 and most of the lower division English courses), service courses (English 1302), and major courses (serving 80 to 100 majors) with non-traditional courses and approaches is a major difficulty.

Report to UCC Task Force #7
Innovations in the Department of Business Administration

Submitted by Thomas W. Gardner
Imogene and Harold D. Herndon Professor Geology

Report submitted for both Biology and Geology

November 22, 1999

Task Force Seven, I had the opportunity to visit with the Geology and Biology departments (Friday) during meetings that discussed our questions. Here are some of the comments.

1. There was a loud and consistent plea to address the course load issue. Nearly everybody voiced the opinion the course load bean counting is a MAJOR stumbling block to innovation at Trinity. Suggested improvements ranged from "Take a year or two year average for load accounting" to let the departments set their own loads and give them the flexibility to distribute load as they see fit. Along those lines discussions quickly moved to "What constitutes course load". In the sciences thesis research/independent study consumes large amounts of time, but is not counted toward load. Also discussed frequently were ideas for team-taught or multi-disciplinary courses and load credit given for them.

2. Resources and their allocation were also high on the innovation list. Conversations in both departments involved the library, the computing center and technology as limits to innovation at Trinity. This may be especially an issue for the sciences, but I think not. We need more and better information technology people on the staff.

3. The ability and ease of getting students into the field seems to be a serious limitation to innovation for both geology and biology. The discussions addressed issues of schedules for all day "field classes", time equivalency for field and lecture courses, and flexibility in scheduling.

4. More student driven research for which supervising faculty get load credit.

5. The electronic classroom and more technology ready classrooms.

6. Fiscal Affairs makes too many discussions that affect Academic Affairs, limiting innovation.

7. Class room size seems to limit innovation. Example, we need lecture halls that hold 200 people for a plenary lecture that then breaks into labs with 20 students each.

Addendum on November 24:

1. The Geoscience department at Trinity is part of the Keck Geology Consortium, a collection of 12 liberal arts institutions of higher education scattered across the country. In 1987, through funding by the W. M. Keck Foundation, the Keck Geology Consortium was created to improve the quality of geologic education at all member schools by offering inter-collegiate projects that engage students and faculty together in cooperative geologic research. The consortium consists of twelve small, predominantly undergraduate institutions and sponsors three major activities: student-faculty research projects, workshops, and a spring symposium for the presentation and discussion of results. Selected by Project Kaleidoscope as one of the first seven "Projects that Work," the Keck Geology Consortium program is now nationally recognized as a model for using a consortium to provide outstanding undergraduate research opportunities. Geology Departments include Amherst College, Beloit College, Carleton College, Colorado College, Franklin & Marshall College, Pomona College, Smith College, Trinity University, Washington & Lee University, Whitman College, Williams College, College of Wooster. (You'll recognize several of these as in the top 10 liberal arts institutions in the country). The web address is < http://celeste.carleton.edu/curricular/GEOL/resource/keck/keck  >. I'd encourage all of you to vist it. We have some great "stuff" posted there with many links to innovative education around the country. Our association in that group gives our geology students a unique opportunity to conduct summer research off campus in a wide variety of places worldwide, to present research results at our annual symposium, to attend workshops throughout the year on a wide range of topics, and to interact on a regular basis with students and faculty from our sister institutions.

2. Biology and Geoscience has initiated an innovative set of joint field/laboratory exercises that combine the Ecology and Geomorphology classes to address a common set of environmental (ecological research/teaching) objectives. These joint exercises involve a weekend field trip to Government Canyon State Natural Area for data collection, several weeks of data anaylsis and an joint presentation to the combined classes. This type of cross-disciplinary course activity has received high marks from students, but is not easily accomplished at any significant level within our current load structure.

3.  Joint field exercises in biology and geology and geosciences

4.  Participation in the Keck Geology Consortium.

TO: UCC Task Force 7

FROM: Stephen Field, compiled from information provided from S. Burke, N. Ekstein, S. Field, A. Forcinito, B. Holl, M. Stroud

RE: Department of Modern Languages and Literatures Survey on Innovation

DATE: January 28, 2000

What innovative, interdisciplinary, non-traditional approaches and programs do you and or your department already practice?

Several of our colleagues regularly offer Languages Across the Curriculum courses, including América española habla, Narody Rossii, Shangye Zhongwen, Les Paroles de la Révolution française, Zhongguo Gudai Sixiang, Deutschland und die Europäische Union: Fakten, Hoffnungen und Ängste, Teorii I iskusstwo russkogo avangarda.

Several of our colleagues regularly offer courses on foreign cinema, including film traditions of France, China and Taiwan, Russia, and Germany.

Two of our colleagues are participating in the multi-disciplinary HUMA courses, and the majority have taught GNED courses. Some of us believe the First Year Seminar is a forum for innovation, although it has now become fashionable to criticize it.

The department received a grant to support software purchases and technology training for its faculty. As a result all department faculty have some expertise in web site creation, and some have become quite adept.  For example the Introduction to Spanish Literature is now online, as is the LAC course, Zhongguo Gudai Sixiang. Other courses regularly utilize computer software or the Internet and must be taught using the electronic classrooms, such as Elementary Spanish II, and First-year Chinese I.  Some language sections have their own web sites that publish syllabi and otherwise assist students in learning the language. See for example the Chinese program home page at http://www.trinity.edu/sfield/Zhongwenxi.html.

Several of our faculty teach courses in the Comparative Literature and International Studies programs, and our faculty are important members of the committees that develop and support them. 

What innovations would you and/or the department and/or the University like to try?

Many ML&L faculty would like to see language houses at Trinity. We would like the new Northrup Hall to be configured so that there are areas dedicated to various languages. Our department would be ideal for team-taught courses--for example, a World Cinema survey, or a World Epic course.

"Study-travel" programs should be encouraged, but not necessarily Trinity-sponsored study abroad programs.

Some faculty are interested in a mini-semester in January or May. It is a fun and optional way to teach and take one subject intensively, earn extra hours, and make use of time that might be wasted otherwise.

Some of us would like to see a Latin American Studies Certificate similar to the Spanish Across the Curriculum language certificate.

What impediments exist that hinder you and/or the department from being innovative?

Some of us are worried that no concrete plan has yet to be presented by the administration that supports interdisciplinary courses.

There seems to be no "creative spirit" up above us that will support the innovations that occasionally bubble up. Language houses have been proposed many times in the past, but the upper levels have not been interested.

Some feel that the campus is too compartmentalized. Some courses taught in Modern Languages should also be listed in the English department, such as our Literature-in-Translation courses. And film courses should also be listed in the communication department. 

The rigid adherence to strict departmental limits, faculty course loads, and budgetary matters (whose budget will pay for something?) all combine to stifle creativity. 

We should be aware that notions like "first-year" and "second-year" are conventions only and should not be treated like natural laws. Our adherence tot he high school format of fifty-minute classes and exams is sometimes a hindrance.

6. Attempt to make classrooms more comfortable and conducive to learning. Frank suggested that we invest in what he called "modular tables," which can be broken up into separate desks if necessary. We also agreed that faculty should be consulted before any changes in the rooms are made

RESULTS OF DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY

DISCUSSION OF INNOVATION TASK FORCE QUESTIONS

DECEMBER 10, 1999

Summary by David Spener

What innovative, interdisciplinary, non-traditional approaches and programs do you and/or your department already practice?

q       We offer courses to students in several interdisciplinary minors, including American Intercultural Studies, Women's Studies, International Studies, and Environmental Studies.

q       Three of us teach courses in our discipline using Spanish as the medium of instruction as part of Trinity's Languages Across the Curriculum program.

q       We teach genuinely interdisciplinary First Year Seminars.

q       Field trips are a regular part of our course work, for example:

·         Primatology students visit the San Antonio zoo.

·         Criminology students visit the jail and attend criminal court proceedings.

·         Deviance students attend 12-step program meetings and visit mental institutions.

·         Sociology of Religion students observe services in local churches, synagogues, and Hindu temples.

·         U.S.-Mexico Border Relations students travel to the border to study border control, immigration, environmental quality, housing, and economic development issues first-hand.

·         Sociology of Childhood and Youth students observe preschool and Head Start programs and visit juvenile detention centers.

·         Pre-Colombian art students use the San Antonio Museum of Art's Latin American collection as a resource.

·         Students in Human Dimensions of the Global Economy (a first year seminar) visit the Levi-Strauss manufacturing facility and have worked on service learning projects with a local worker-rights organization.

q       Our department maintains data archives of the General Social Survey that are also  used by faculty and students in Political Science, Communications, and Business.

q       One of our faculty, Mike Kearl, has developed and continually revises an award-winning sociology web site and uses web development as a teaching tool with students.  He has also published an on-line manual for CHIP, a user-friendly statistical software package that enables lower-level undergraduate students at Trinity to engage in real data analysis in the classroom.

q       Our faculty have engaged in collaborative research with undergraduate students that has resulted in the presentation of papers at professional conferences.

q       Jennifer Mathews will be teaching a special summer course through the Associated Colleges of the South that will explore environmental citizenship in the Yucatán Peninsula of Mexico.  The course will be co-taught by a biologist, an archeologist, and an ecologist.  In addition, Dr. Mathews runs an archeological field school for Trinity students in the Yucatan in collaboration with an international team of teachers/researchers.

q       We encourage our students to engage in service-learning projects  and practicums in the local community by awarding them credit for doing so.

What innovations would you and/or your department and/or the University like to try?

q       As a department, we would like to develop an in-house applied social research unit that would involve faculty and students in conducting collaborative research projects with community-based organizations in San Antonio.   This might include the production of professional-quality video documentaries that could be used to raise public awareness of important issues affecting the community.

q       We would like to see the development at Trinity of international exchange programs with foreign institutions in the social sciences and the humanities that would involve both faculty and students.

q       Some of us would like to be able to offer intensive courses that would involve travel during a winter or spring inter-session.

q       We would be interested in developing "modular" courses of 1-2 credits within our department.

q       Members of the department would like to have more opportunities to team-teach courses with faculty within our own department and with faculty in other disciplines.

q       We would like to see an expansion of Languages Across the Curriculum offerings on campus, especially Spanish, including perhaps the addition of 3-hour courses.

q       We agree that it is important for the university to develop initiatives to promote quantitative and informational literacy across the curriculum.

q       Our faculty would like to be able to use teleconferencing with other institutions and organizations in our classroom teaching.

What structural changes (i.e., redefining "course load" or faculty work) would promote innovation?

q       The divisional structure at Trinity needs reform.  Our department feels that we should be in a single division including the humanities and the social sciences rather than with business, health care administration, and other non-liberal arts programs.

q       The department strongly feels that the university unnecessarily imposes bureaucratic hurdles that discourage faculty from taking students on off-campus field trips.  These hurdles need to be removed.  (example: the university should insure instructors for personal liability for their off-campus teaching activities).

q       We also strongly feel that the Vice President for Academic Affairs should be very actively involved in promoting and encouraging educational innovation on campus.

q       Trinity should re-think the faculty teaching load to promote innovation.  Examples would include giving faculty release time and  awarding summer stipends or leave requests to develop innovative courses/programs.

q       Switching to a 4-4 student course load could potentially expand the opportunities for innovation in our classes by making it possible for us engage students in more time-consuming non-traditional projects outside of normal class meetings.

q       There should be increased recognition for the development of innovative courses, practices, and programs in the faculty tenure and merit review process.  In addition, faculty should not be penalized for less-than-glowing student evaluations of innovative courses when such courses are being taught for the first time.

q       Interdisciplinary and team teaching should be encouraged and rewarded, perhaps by building them into the common curriculum itself.

What major academic activities beyond  normal teaching and advising engage your time for which you receive no compensation such as release time or financial compensation?

q       New course development.

q       Preparation of seniors for graduate and professional schools

q       Letters of recommendation for students and helping students plug into professional networks

q       Assisting students with applications for scholarships, internships, etc. (e.g., Fulbright scholarships)

q       No sick leave coverage (i.e., having to fill in teaching for a colleague suffering a lengthy illness).

The Trinity Plan developed at a Mid-Career Institute last year sponsored by the Council on Undergraduate Research and Project Kaleidoscope.  Paul, Linda Salvucci, Karen Waldron and Chuck White developed the plan..

1.  We need to be careful in articulating our ideas to the Faculty and Administration.

2.  We claim to be very teaching-oriented, but we do not provide the kinds of faculty development resources for teaching that we have for "disciplinary" scholarly work.

a.  Create a Center for Teaching and Leaning (with a small staff) to promote and assist with, e.g. technology training, summer and other workshops, outside speakers, improving teaching, interest groups, curriculum development, etc.

b.  Some faculty members might, with reduced loads, play a role in the Center's activities (e.g. technology training).

3.  Re-investigate our Faculty Development process to improve the likelihood of obtaining resources to improve teaching and the curriculum (e.g., leaves and summer stipends for such purposes, curriculum development grants).

4.  Reduced load opportunities for tenured faculty.

5.  For new faculty:

a.  Develop a forma system of (and encourage informal) mentoring.

b.  Seek resources for academic leave opportunities for untenured faculty.

c.  Make a reduced load opportunity part of the offer to new faculty.