(Attending Don Ostdiek, Keith Hamm, Mark Weisner, Rick Stoll and from the Curriculum Review Committee: Priscilla Huston, Kathleen Matthews and Carol Quillen)
Handouts:
THE POLICY STUDIES MAJOR: A PROPOSED RECONFIGURATION (Draft Copy) ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCES (Draft Report)
This meeting was called at the suggestion of Robert Stein, the Dean of Social Sciences, and Don Ostdiek of the Policy Studies program organized the attendees.
Policy Studies is never a primary major, it is always part of at least a double major. It has been menu driven and interdisciplinary in nature. There are proposals in place for restructuring to some extent; both the basic curriculum and areas of concentration are under revision. In many ways, Policies Studies services other majors and it's real problem is to continue to attract and service other studies such as Health Care, Environment, or Policy Analysis. The attendees made clear that Policy Studies is not a "minor." It is a double major, has primarily advanced courses (though not lots of prerequisites), is interdisciplinary, cross cultural, and emphasizes critical thinking skills. The focus is more on skills than specific knowledge. There was a general feeling that there ought to be good correlation with general education and Policy Studies; but there is also concern that requirements for general education could perturb "current" plans. We all agreed that this is possible but at the present time, the best thing is for Policy Studies to proceed and keep us informed. They seemed to understand and accept that this may lead to additional change down the road. Their reports are already at the Provost's and President's Offices.
Two questions were posed and we discussed the issues associated with them though the answers are still evolving.
1) To what extent will Curriculum Review change the distribution system? Policy Studies is based on relationship between its program and that of other departments. If the departments have less discretion with respect to general education in the future, this could impact Policy Studies. Concern was expressed that general education could lead to large classes and that this could impact quality. It is anticipated that there will be a lot of relationship between the requirements for a general education and those for Policy Studies double major.
2) Are there issues related to double majors? Although it is a "tag" on major, Policy Studies intends to bring more depth, not more introductory courses to the students. It is anticipated that the introductory skills and information will come through the first major. The attendees wanted to be sure that the Curriculum Review Committee focuses on advanced as well as introductory skills for Rice Graduates. As a second major, they expect that students will get introductory experiences in the primary major and currently expect at lease 6 courses plus a research seminar for all students prior to Policy Studies.
They made us aware that "how" distribution or general education is approved would impact their approach. They are hopeful that students will be exposed to: multiple forms of critical thinking, logical thinking, life-long learning, ways of developing new skills, interdisciplinary approaches, and multi-cultural (Western and non-western) approaches.
We talked about Environmental Engineering and its interests in combining with other majors as well as Policy Studies. The "spider model" using environment as a focal point around which other rings could be built was presented. Students could pick a focal point rather than a specific set of courses to bring their studies together. In some sense, the spider model with environment at the center is an "applied approach to general education." The courses develop around the focal point and gradually more advanced courses are offered. It is important that these courses integrate different areas of knowledge and that they are intensively team taught. It was suggested that we take a look at Bill Leeman's Love-Bake course (http://ruf.rice.edu/~leeman/lovebake.html) which is a Lovett-Baker College course. It may be easier to get some of these courses started through the colleges. It is an extra burden on the faculty but separates those who want to do it seriously. We were encouraged to think about requiring concepts versus courses. It was noted that how a concept is taught makes a difference -- students need a context of how they might "use" what they learn; they need a balance between the theoretical and the applied.
How do we change over time? It will require lots of resources and time. Some faculty are used to lots of students who are not majoring in their discipline, willing to share their materials, and are willing to team teach, even across disciplines. Others are not. The idea of a "contingent curriculum" was presented where some things are general but others are individual student specific. In general, it is better not to impose even a sense of "general education." It needs to evolve and become part of the culture at Rice.