Does scientific literacy require a special skill set separate from critical thinking, quantitative reasoning and information literacy? Should students earning a baccalaureate degree be required to demonstrate scientific literacy – regardless of major – but not historical literacy, constitutional literacy, media literacy or another content-specific literacy?
Or, perhaps more to the point, do the challenges facing the world today demand that universities confer special status on science education?
Those questions are at the heart of an ongoing debate over revisions to WSU’s Six Learning Goals of the Baccalaureate (http://vpue.wsu.edu/overview/sixgoals/). Originally created in 2004 by WSU’s President’s Teaching Academy, the six goals incorporated four established by the state’s Higher Education Coordinating Board for public colleges and universities and added two more: “Self in society” and “specialty.”
New proposal would unify variations
Tom Tripp, a founding member of the Teaching Academy and chair of the General Education Committee, said the original goals were meant to help guide all curricular and instructional decisions from freshman survey courses to senior capstone projects. The “specialty” goal was a placeholder for each program to add learning goals specific to its discipline or field of study.
Tom Tripp, a founding member of the Teaching Academy and chair of the General Education Committee, said the original goals were meant to help guide all curricular and instructional decisions from freshman survey courses to senior capstone projects. The “specialty” goal was a placeholder for each program to add learning goals specific to its discipline or field of study.
But over the past several years, variations on the original six learning goals emerged at WSU Vancouver, in the Honors College and in General Education. In addition, there was longstanding dissatisfaction with the “self in society” goal, which many people found difficult to interpret or translate to a course syllabi.
Starting in spring 2010, members of the Teaching Academy and the General Education Committee worked together to create a new version of learning goals intended to put the entire university back on the same page. The main change was to rename the last two goals.
“Self in society” became “intercultural and civic engagement” and “specialty” was reworded to “depth, breadth and integration of learning,” to reflect that a baccalaureate degree requires all three attributes. The proposed learning goals can be found on the Faculty Senate website under the agenda for Oct. 28.
Because all versions were similar – differing in details but not direction – Tripp said the committee did not expect the new version to run into opposition at the Faculty Senate. But it has.
Scientific literacy goal proposed
The sticking point seems to be that the new learning goals do not specifically name scientific literacy. The issue has been raised at two Faculty Senate meetings, where discussion of the new learning goals was cut short because of time constraints.
The sticking point seems to be that the new learning goals do not specifically name scientific literacy. The issue has been raised at two Faculty Senate meetings, where discussion of the new learning goals was cut short because of time constraints.
At the Oct. 28 meeting, professors Gary Collins, physics, and David Gaylord, earth and environmental sciences, proposed adding a seventh goal focused on scientific literacy. Created by a faculty committee in the College of Sciences, the proposed goal reads: “Graduates will have a basic knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision-making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity.”
The committee offered two alternate versions as well.
With a motion on the floor to add scientific literacy to the proposed revision of the Six Learning Goals of the Baccalaureate, time ran out. (The senate meeting room, FSHN 101, is used for a class at 5:10 p.m., so late meetings aren’t an option.)
Faculty Senate Chair Max Kirk said the plan is to send the entire set of learning goals, plus the seventh goal proposed by the College of Sciences, back to the Faculty Senate Academic Affairs Committee for reconsideration.
Working it out in committee
Kirk said that from what he has heard, there is consensus for adding the science goal.
“We’re saying the seventh goal is fine,” he said. “We’re saying they all need a little more work.” For instance, he said, he has heard from some faculty members that the goals are too wordy and, in some cases, confusing.
“However it turns out, whether there are six, seven or eight goals, I think it’s important that this is done right,” he said.
Kirk invited senators to send him their comments regarding all of the goals so that information could be forwarded to the Academic Affairs Committee. Because of the workload facing the Faculty Senate this semester and the limited meeting time, Kirk said, he’d like to get many of the issues ironed out before the learning goals come before the senate again.
Learning goals must be broad
Mary Wack, dean of University College and vice provost for undergraduate education, said she agrees that taking the time to create a set of learning goals that enjoy broad faculty support is crucial. But, she said, universitywide learning goals are not the same thing as learning outcomes that each department creates for its own majors.
The learning goals of the baccalaureate need to be broad enough that every teacher in every course can use them as a lodestar, she said. Scientific literacy is important, she said, but so are many different kinds of literacy, which is why the learning goals focus on the skills and capabilities common to all – critical thinking, quantitative reasoning and information literacy.
Tripp, who helped draft the original goals and the version before the Faculty Senate, said he believes there is some confusion about the relationship between general education and the learning goals. The learning goals do not apply only to general education, they apply to the entire undergraduate curriculum – all 120 credits of it, Tripp said, just as the previous learning goals did.
The General Education Committee that is working on revised scope and sequence for general education would like to get the revised learning goals in place before it proceeds very much further because those learning goals should guide all curricular and instructional decisions, he said.
The next Faculty Senate meeting is scheduled for Nov. 18. Comments on the proposed learning goals can be sent to faculty senators or to Dorene Branson (Branson@wsu.edu ), principal assistant for the Faculty Senate, who will forward them to the Academic Affairs Committee.