Who are the members of the Steering Committee

Our Steering Committee was appointed in April 2019 by the President of the Bloomington Faculty Council. The co-chairs of the Steering Committee are: 

 John Arthos (jarthos@indiana.edu), Professor, Department of English

Clark Barwick (mbarwick@indiana.edu), Senior Lecturer, Kelley School of Business and Associate Director, IU Faculty Academy on Excellence in Teaching (FACET) 

J Duncan (johfdunc@indiana.edu), Senior Lecturer and Associate Chair, Informatics

Micol Seigel (mseigel@indiana.edu), Professor, American Studies & History

What has the Task Force done since it was constituted?

In order to understand its charge, the Steering Committee spent its first year working on two fronts: (A) To gain a sense of how well the current Gen Ed program is working, it researched the history of general education and its program development at IUB, held open meetings with the Bloomington campus community to solicit feedback on the current program, and began targeted consultation with faculty, student, and administrative groups on campus. (B) In order to discover current best practices for Gen Ed and for Gen Ed reform, the Steering Committee held interviews with colleges and universities across the country who have implemented successful or highly recommended Gen Ed reforms recently. 

In its second year, the Steering Committee began to turn its attention to the broad range of possible options for Gen Ed reform at IUB based on what it had learned, and took a number of specific steps to develop a knowledge base for its reporting:  it attended Teagle Foundation and NEH workshops to learn about a prominent reform project at a sister institution, applied for a general education program reform grant, conducted a campus-wide undergraduate student survey on general education at IUB, and developed a subcommittee structure as outlined by the original BFC charge to take its work to the next stage.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

[Link to Teagle Foundation grant application]

[Link to “Town Hall recordings” - separate by date]

[Link to “First Town Hall Meeting Agenda & Resources”]

[Link to “Survey of IUB Undergraduates”]

[Link to “Survey of IUB Undergraduate Advisors”]

[Link to “Town Hall Faculty Survey” Questions and “Faculty Answers”]

[Link to folder “Bibliography consulted by the Task Force” containing bibliography we drew upon in order to proceed:

Reforming Ged Ed.pdf

Chancellors’ Scholars Vision Statement

aac-Strong_Foundations_Twelve Principles

General Education & Liberal Learning:  Principles of Effective Practice]

Working Subcommittees

The Steering Committee developed five working subcommittees:

Liaison Committee:  coordinates between the Task Force and each of the campus’s 16 units that either host or support GenEd. Work ongoing.

Committee on Comparable Institutions:  researched and reported back on five Big Ten schools that have reviewed and revised their GenEd programs.  Work concluded.

Clusters Committee:  Investigated the feasibility and advantages/disadvantages of a “cluster” model for IU GenEd.  Work concluded. [or did it basically never happen?]

Enduring Questions Sub-Committee:  Investigated the feasibility and advantages/disadvantages of an “enduring questions” model for IU GenEd. Work concluded.

Policy Committee:  Explores the legal requirements at the state level and budgetary implications at the campus level that might limit GenEd revision and brainstorm ways around such barriers.  Work ongoing.

You may click on each subcommittee to see its full charge, membership, and in some cases, reports produced.

CHARGES:

Liaison Committee:  Gather information from each unit regarding advantages and disadvantages of the current GenEd model.  Liaise with the policy committee of each unit or school, conveying the task force’s process and progress to the unit, bringing input and requests from the unit to the task force, helping the unit understand any possibilities under consideration, seeking to minimize problems that might be generated in any given unit by any GenEd model or changes under consideration.  

Committee on Comparable Institutions:  Select five Big Ten schools and determine if their current GenEd structure can instruct us in any way.  Determine whether they have had any recent GenEd assessment, or if there are major reform plans in the past, present, or near future.  Compose a report detailing your findings.

Clusters Committee:  Investigate whether IU Gen Ed could productively and practically be organized as a “cluster” model in which students pursue thematically-organized clusters of coursework within GenEd. Consider whether each cluster would expose students to the major ways of knowing; consider whether each would or could include math.  Imagine a likely common place or experience that could give participant courses a tangible and compelling means to connect with each other so that the cluster does not degenerate into a mere checklist. Wonder whether students of any interest could find a cluster that would absorb them.  Ask if each cluster you envision would live up to the rationale of the IU GenEd mission.  Develop mechanisms for determining which courses would fall in which cluster, and what distributive problems might remain.

Enduring Questions:  Investigate whether IU Gen Ed could productively and practically be organized around enduring questions, e.g., What should matter to me? How should we live together? How can we understand the world? What will I do?). Consider whetheran “enduring questions” approach would inspire students more than our current distribution model.  Consider whether an “enduring questions” approach would be a substantial improvement, as a substantive matter, to our GenEd, from the faculty perspective.  Attempt to predict administrative or logistical problems with this approach.

Policy Committee:  Explore the legal requirements at the state level for GenEd transferability and the possibilities for changing those legislatively (through lobbying), administratively (through adding requirements for campus-specific courses, sequences, sidecars), and substantively (by creating courses students want earnestly to take at IUB).  Explore the budgetary impact of any GenEd revision and the possibilities for altering RCM so that GenEd courses would not damage unit budgets.

MEMBERSHIP

Liaison Committee:  

1. School of Education:  Keith C. Barton - CHAIR
2. Maurer School of Law:  Steve Sanders
3. Kelley School of Business:  Chris Thomas
4. Luddy School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering:  J Duncan
5. Eskenazi School of Art, Architecture, and Design:  Mary Embry
6. School of Nursing:  Marsha Hughes-Gay
7. School of Social Work:  Carol Hostetter
8. Hamilton Lugar School of Global and International Studies:  Marianne Kamp
9. Media School:  Galen Clavio  
10. College of Arts and Sciences:  Paul Gutjahr
11. School of Public Health:  Margaret Melanie Lion
12. Jacobs School of Music:  Joey Tartell, Petar Jankovic
13. O'Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs:  Andrea Need, Susan Siena
14. School of Medicine:  Valerie O’Loughlin
15. Libraries:  Erin Ellis 
16. NTT caucus:  Sofiya Asher

Committee on Comparable Institutions:  

1. Chris Thomas - CHAIR
2. Chase McCoy

Clusters Committee:  

1. Cathrine Reck 
2. Lisa Jane Thomassen
3. John Thomas Stone III 
4. Justin Grossman 

Enduring Questions Committee:

1. Padraic Kenney, History & International Studies - CHAIR
2. Massimo Scalabrini, Italian
3. Diane Dallis-Comentale, Library 
4. Chris DeSante, Political Science
5. Cooper Harriss, Religious Studies
6. David Kehoe, Biology
7. Joan Pong Linton, English
8. Kate Abramson, Philosophy
9. Phil Richerme, Physics

Policy Committee:

1. Janine Drake (OVPUAA, School Partnerships; College, History) CHAIR
2. Erin Ellis (Libraries) 
3. Deborah Deliyannis (College, History)
4. Micol Seigel (College, American Studies) 
5. Bradley Levinson (School of Ed) 
6. Colin Johnson (College, Gender Studies) 
7. Maria Bucur (College, History) 

Infrequently Asked Questions

Has the Task Force come to any conclusions about the need for and direction of general education program reform?

The Task Force has not formulated any firm or broad conclusions about the appropriate direction of program revision or improvement. In this, our third year, we are still following a deliberate and measured process of consultation with faculty, students, advisors, administrators and colleagues in other institutions.  We will continue to receive input via the Liaison Committee (see above for your unit representative if you would like to comment), the BFC, and Task Force subcommittees (if you would like to join one, please contact its chair).  In year four (2022-23) the Task Force will formulate recommendations to be fully considered by the BFC and more broadly by faculty and administrators across Bloomington’s campus. 

What is the timeline for the Task Force?

The BFC originally asked the Task Force for a final report in 2020, but because of COVID and other factors, the Task Force Steering Committee asked the Executive Committee for additional time. The revised plan asked the content Subcommittees to submit their reports by the end of 2021. The Steering Committee reviewed these reports in the spring of 2022, made follow-up inquiries based on those reports, solicited additional faculty input, and is now moving forward.  The Task Force will hold a general faculty Q&A in the fall of 2022 and submit a final report to the BFC at the end of that term. 

What are future plans of the Task Force?

In Fall of 2022, the Task Force will present its final report to the Bloomington Faculty Council, outlining the information we have collected and the feedback we have received from students, faculty, and staff. At this time the Task Force will also present a variety of paths forward for General Education at IU Bloomington. While this presentation will include areas of action, the Task Force is not charged with presenting a specific recommendation for large-scale change.

At this time, the Task Force will invite the Bloomington Faculty Council to consider the creation of a follow-up group to take up the implementation of any large-scale change to General Education. The BFC deciding no such change is needed is also a possible outcome.

How can I contact the Task Force and give my feedback?

Any of the co-chairs of the Task Force can be sent feedback via email. Additionally, the chairs of any of the subcommittees can also accept feedback via email. Should the Task Force conduct any further surveys or town halls, these will be announced to the campus as a whole.

If you would like your feedback to be presented at the Bloomington Faculty Council, please contact your representative(s).

How can I learn more about the work of the Task Force?

If you would like to know more about the activities of the Task Force, you can contact one of the co-chairs via email or the chairs of any of the subcommittees via email. Many of the documents we have produced will be available on this website for review.