Introduction
    This document offers interim guidelines for the review of general education courses. These guidelines apply to non-capstone courses and will be in effect through the Spring 2000 semester or until revised guidelines are approved, whichever is later.
    The new general education policy (Policy Statement 00-00) represents a fundamental change in this campus’s approach to general education. As a consequence, for many courses now in the general education program, past experience is less relevant to their suitability for general education credit than future practice.  Therefore, while initial approval of courses will require description of the course outcomes, explanation of the skills and attributes that will be developed in the course, and description of the approaches that will be used to develop skills and measure outcomes, course renewals will additionally require documentation that course goals are being met and, in the case of multi-section courses, that all sections are adhering to the standard course outline.

Steps in Approval Process
1.  The department prepares a course proposal as described below.

2. The proposal is reviewed by the department and college curriculum committees. If the course is approved by department and college curriculum committees, the Dean of the college (or designee) forwards the request to the GEGC.

3. GEGC then will schedule the course for review. Courses will be scheduled in the order they are received, except that initially 100-level courses will be given higher priority for review. Representatives from departments presenting courses are invited to be present at the meeting at which the course is reviewed.

4. The initial review period will cover lower division courses only. The time line for initial review of courses will be as follows:
Spring 1999: GEGC will work with departments offering Cornerstones courses to expedite these reviews. In addition, GEGC will work with selected other 100-level courses in development and review of course proposals Spring 1999: Departments wishing to have courses reviewed during the 1999-2000 academic year should prepare proposals and submit them to the College Curriculum Committee. Individual College committees will determine deadlines for submission. November 1, 1999: Deadline for completion of review by College Curriculum Committees for guaranteed consideration by GEGC during the 1999-2000 academic year. All courses now holding general education certification that are received by the deadline will retain their current general education status until the review is complete. While courses may be submitted after the deadline, and GEGC will review such courses if time is available, courses received after the deadline will lose general education status for Fall 2000 if the reviews cannot be completed. Courses will generally be handled as received, but exceptions may be made for compelling reasons. Colleges are encouraged to submit courses before the deadline.  Fall 1999: Deadlines for upper division, non-capstone courses will be announced. While departments are encouraged to begin developing course proposals for these courses immediately, reviews will not be scheduled until existing lower division courses have been reviewed.

5. Following the initial review, all approved courses will be scheduled for a follow-up assessment. At this time, the GEGC will review a course portfolio (described below.) Subsequent renewals of approval will also require the portfolio.

6. In order to facilitate identification of existing non-Capstone courses that will be seeking GE certification under the new program, the GEGC is requesting that the Dean (or designee) of each college prepare a list of such courses – essentially, a statement of intent to apply for GE certification. Each course should be identified as to its name and number as of Fall 1999, the previous course number (if the number has been changed), its current GE classification, and the prerequisite statement (which should be consistent with the requested level.) Courses so identified will be certified for general education credit for the 1999-2000 academic year, even though formal review may not have been completed.

7. Proposals for new general education courses are welcome. However, such courses will not appear in the approved list of general education courses until after their review.

Before Submitting a Request for GE Approval
    Before developing a general education course proposal, the course developer should become familiar with the general education policy and its expectations. In reviewing course proposals, the GEGC will look for documentation of the ways in which the policy is being met as well as consider whether the course in question is appropriate to the category and level requested.
    The general education program at CSULB is organized as a hierarchy with three stages, Foundations, Explorations, and Capstone. Each of these stages has specific requirements regarding course numbers and prerequisites statements, as well as expectations regarding development of academic skills. The Foundation is described in section I.A of Policy Statement 00-00. Expectations and requirements for Explorations courses are described in section I.B of the policy statement, while the Capstone is described in section I.C  [More detailed guidelines for Capstone courses are pending]
    Over the course of these three stages, students will also satisfy breadth requirements. These requirements are presented in outline in section I.B of the policy statement, and are described in detail in section IV.  The requirements for human diversity courses are described in section VI of the policy statement. [At this time, revised guidelines for Global courses are not yet available. Until such guidelines are published, courses may be considered for “G” status based on the requirements of category D2.A in the previous policy (96-00.)]
    In serving the breadth requirement of the baccalaureate degree, GE courses must acquaint students with both the subject matter and the methodologies of the various discipline categories. Except when specifically noted in category criteria statements, courses in each category should explicitly demonstrate what sorts of questions are studied by those disciplines, what kinds of evidence are sought, and how evidence is interpreted and used. It is expected that whenever it is appropriate, students will have the opportunity to work with original sources, either in the original language or in translation.
    General education courses should be designed to permit instructors to show students why those who work in the field find the subject matter interesting and valuable, how the subject matter is related to other fields, and why the subject matter has relevance for the student’s life and educational objectives.
    All GE courses must demonstrably encourage development of skills and attributes in accordance with the above stages. All Explorations courses must encourage the development of one or more of the skills and attributes described in section I.B; it is anticipated that faculty developing such courses will choose to emphasize the particular skills or attributes most appropriate to the subject matter. In addition, all Explorations courses must demonstrate advancement of one or more skills from the areas of written communication, oral communication, critical thinking, or mathematical/quantitative reasoning.
    Courses that seek to advance writing skills must have sequenced writing assignments with timely feedback. If the course claims that writing skills are a primary concern, then the class must be of a size or use strategies that allow this requirement to be met. Demonstrations of writing might include discursive writing on examinations, papers, laboratory reports, journals, or other forms as appropriate to the discipline.
    Course components and teaching strategies designed to develop critical and analytical thinking skills will vary considerably according to the disciplines involved, but should include such exercises as logical thinking, problem solving, evaluation of evidence and reasoning, critiques of published writings and reports, or analysis of data.
    Course components designed to develop oral communication skills should highlight a speaker’s construction and delivery of a message to a specific receiver or audience. Class assignments or activities include public speeches to inform or persuade, small group decision-making or problem-solving, panel presentations, interviews, structured individual or group debates, oral interpretive readings and analyses, or a series of structured dyadic interactions. Active listening and audience/receiver analysis and adaptation are critical elements that should accompany all of the speaking assignments and activities above.
    Course components designed to develop mathematical and/or quantitative reasoning will also vary by discipline, but will emphasize the application of quantitative methods to problems in the discipline. Examples include numerical problem solving, including multi-step problems, developing mathematical models to describe phenomena in various fields, quantitative measurements, graphical display and statistical analysis of data, analysis of spatial attributes including shape and symmetry, and estimation. While it is entirely appropriate to incorporate the use of technological tools (specialized software, graphing calculators, etc. ), the emphasis should be on technology as a tool for understanding underlying concepts.
    These opportunities for demonstration of skills must include a system of timely feedback so that the student has opportunities to develop and improve skills.
    Certain course components and strategies are inherently undesirable for effective development of skills. If a course relies heavily on such approaches, the developer of the course will have the burden of proof in demonstrating that adequate skill development is occurring. Undesirable practices include excessive reliance on Scantron examinations, excessive reliance on rote memorization, the use of writing assignments that do not include opportunities for students to receive constructive criticism and feedback in a timely, constructive manner (e. g. 2-3 weeks), and other practices that do not allow students to demonstrate the skills they have acquired.
    All courses must conform to all relevant University policies. Course descriptions may not include statements prohibiting recourse for documented, unavoidable circumstances.

Materials Which Must Accompany Initial Requests for GE Approval
1. “GE” Form: “Request for Approval of a Course for General Education Credit.” Must be signed by the Department chair, College Curriculum Committee Chair, and Dean of the College  (or designee). If the course is listed in more than one college, both colleges must submit a form. For existing courses, a photocopy of the current catalog description must be included. If the course is a new course, or has been changed since publication of the most recent catalog, a copy of the signed curriculum form (form CF) must be included. Other information will include the general education categories requested and the offering history over the last three years. (Note that GE policy asks for departments to show cause why a course should not be dropped from the program if it has not been offered in the past two years, and courses that have not been offered for three years will be dropped automatically.)
 
2. Standard Course Outline. This document governs the individual syllabi for all instructors in a course. It contains:
......Official catalog description of the course
......List of measurable course objectives and outcomes
......Outline of  subject matter to be covered (which may be thematic or sequential)
......Modes of instruction
.....Extent and nature of the use of technology
.....Instructional requirements for all faculty teaching the course, which will typically include
• specification of text(s)
• mandatory assignments
• types of exams and other demonstrations of competence
• approximate percentage of course grade to be assigned to various course requirements.
......Other bibliographic resources, such as additional texts, monographs, journals, periodicals, government publications, or other sources from which course content may be drawn or readings may be assigned.
3. Supporting documents. These will include:

a. Each syllabus for the last two semesters in which the course was offered (if only one section was offered each semester), or all the syllabi for the most recent semester of offering, in the case of a multi-section course. Syllabi should follow the guidelines in the Faculty Handbook. In the case of courses with large numbers of sections, the department should consult with the chair of GEGC for alternate arrangements.
b. Sample examination questions, term paper topics, course projects, homework, or other assignments or activities, as appropriate, that demonstrate how course outcomes are measured. If the course has multiple instructors, representative questions from several instructors should be included. If the above material is described in the syllabi or course outline, it need not be repeated here.
c. Information on course components which are designed to develop skills appropriate to the course and level. This must include discussion of instructional strategies designed to advance skills as well as methods used to measure skills. This narrative should explicitly state which skills are being developed.
d. Discussion of other aspects relevant to the particular course. These might include:

(1) whether the course is offered as part of an organized learning community program;
(2) whether, in the case of large lectures, there are opportunities for class discussion, student interaction, small group work, or other factors that would enhance the classroom environment (especially relevant to classes targeted to first time freshmen);
(3) if the class is offered in multiple sections, practices that exist to ensure conformity to the standard course outline and uniformity of standards;
(4) if film or other audio-visual materials are used in the course, indication of amount of class time devoted to such materials, and the relationship between viewing/listening and the academic activity of the course. In addition, provide information as to why the class requires in-class viewing/listening rather than out-of-class preparation time.

a.  Additional documentation regarding course standards, skill development, and student outcomes, such as anonymous examples of student work demonstrating attainment of course objectives, results of student surveys or interviews, or other materials.
b.  Supporting documentation related to section 3 (d) above.

 The GEGC may request additional information if the course portfolio appears to be inadequate.

11/23/98