The LAS Curriculum Committee is engaged in examining and exploring various alternatives to effecting General Education at ISU. In so doing, committee members are seeking input from curriculum chairs. LAS members wish to emphasize that such input might feature ideas that are outside the current paradigm of "Groups." The purpose of this effort is to increase the effectiveness and attractiveness of a baccalaureate degree at ISU.

• To what extent do current learning outcomes for GER study at ISU capture what general education could/should be about at this university?

The central importance of a general education is reflected in the learning goals of each of four disciplinary areas. Whereas the courses in a major are designed to develop mastery of a specific field or discipline, courses in general education are designed to establish a strong, intellectual foundation for all specializations. Students earn the minimum credits listed in each of the four general education groups in courses not required by the department of the first major listed on the degree program. Interdisciplinary courses may be used to satisfy requirements in any group for which they have been approved, but a student may not apply the same course to more than one group.

- Students should develop an understanding of human cultural heritage and history, and an appreciation of reasoning and the aesthetic value of human creativity.
- Students should develop skill in and an understanding of the principles involved in effective communication among people.
- Students should experience science as a rational search for understanding the structure and behavior of the natural world, and should appreciate mathematics as a valuable tool of the sciences and as an intrinsically important way of thinking.
- Students should develop an appreciation of the principal methods of studying human behavior and an understanding of the structure and functioning of institutions.

• What paradigms besides the current "groups" would effectively address general education learning outcomes?

• Should general education requirements be organized around courses or around curricula or around some other method of arrangement, such as competencies?

• In what ways could/should general education requirements encourage discipline-specific methodologies and writing?

• To what extent could/should courses be developed or "sectioned" to serve specific student clientele?

• How might changes in pedagogical format be enlisted in the task of general education (innovations in lecture, esp. to include more writing; smaller classes at various levels; capstone experiences, etc.); how might different formats be effectively balanced in a student’s POS?

• To what extent is the current proportional credit load successful (50 credits, gen. ed.; 48 credits max, major; 20 credits minor/electives)?

• To what extent do distributional requirements within the major work effectively?

• How do the university-wide first-year requirements (Engl. 104, 105, Lib. 160) integrate with general education requirements? How should/could these university-wide requirements be reconceived? How does ISUComm fit in here?

• How might linked courses help address general education issues?

• What type of articulation agreements might be necessary among departments with certain revisions of general education requirements? With current practice?