UMD Liberal Education Forum

Liberal Education Task Force
Year-End Report
May 16, 2007

The Liberal Education Task Force was constituted in late fall 2006 and given the following charge: to look at recommendations drafted by the Liberal Education Policy Subcommittee of EPC; to review, in-depth, the information gathered by that subcommittee and any other data the task force wished to collect, and, finally to “propose a future direction and mission for the liberal education program at UMD.�?

TASK FORCE MEMBERSHIP
The following were appointed to the task force in late November:
Carol Bock, CLA, co-chair
Ashley Brown, student
David Doorn, SBE
Christina Gallup, CSE
Tim Holst, CSE Associate Dean
Molly Minkkinen, CEHSP
Bill Payne, co-chair, SFA
Pam Spencer, CLA Student Affairs

In addition to the eight members originally appointed, Tom Wegren (SFA) joined the committee as a replacement for Bill Payne, who was on research leave during spring 2007. Bill was kept abreast of task force activities and rejoined the group for our last two meetings of the year; he is prepared to resume his responsibilities as co-chair. Another addition to our group since it was initially constituted is Tami Vatalaro, who provides much needed staff support.

TASK FORCE ACTIVITIES
The Liberal Education Task Force has met regularly, for a total of 14 times, since the committee was formed (see attached minutes). Our main activity in Spring 2007 has been learning. Co-chair Bill Payne has had years of service in the EPC Liberal Education Subcommittee, but the rest of us are relative newcomers to the issues surrounding liberal education reform. While each of us brings significant experience and an important perspective to the committee’s work, none of us was well-enough informed initially to discuss—far less give advice on—the direction liberal education should take in the future. Our first task, therefore, was to educate ourselves.

PRIOR TO SPRING TERM: We began by turning to the knowledgeable source most immediately at hand: our fellow task force member, Bill Payne. During our initial meetings Bill reviewed for us the work that has already been accomplished by the Liberal Education Subcommittee, “unpacking�? (as he put it) the data that had been gathered over a five-year period of assessment. We talked about what more we needed to learn and how we would go about gathering that information. We agreed to meet with a number of individuals and groups on campus during spring semester, and developed a plan for garnering input from all UMD faculty. We engaged in exploratory conversations about some of the complex and controversial topics related to liberal education reform, mostly in an effort to orient ourselves with respect to those issues and to get to know each other better. Finally, we put together an action plan for the rest of the year. Much of this activity occurred at a 4.5 hour meeting on Saturday, December 28.

SPRING TERM: Beginning in the second week of spring semester, the Liberal Education Task Force met regularly, approximately every other week, for 90-minute sessions. Accomplishments for spring term are as follows:
• Further reviewed data provided by the EPC Liberal Education Subcommittee; requested and reviewed additional data to clarify questions raised by initial data. Relevant data sheets are attached.
• Designed a questionnaire for gathering additional data on student perceptions regarding liberal education. This survey will be sent to UMD alumnae who graduated between the years 1990–2005. Institutional Research is currently working on this project for us; the committee hopes to have results for their review when we reconvene in Fall 2007. Draft questionnaire is attached.
• Worked through the Collegiate Associate Deans to foster meaningful discussion about liberal education, first at the departmental level, then at department heads meetings in each of the collegiate units, and finally among the associate deans themselves and with members of the task force. This was a fairly lengthy process, occurring over the period of about two months. Summaries/compilations of opinions gathered from this process are attached to this report.
• Met with EPC twice for the purpose of gathering input and sharing information. Excerpts from EPC minutes are attached.
• Met with the Council of Deans for the purpose of gathering input and answering questions.
• Met with Chris Haidos to learn more about the place of liberal education in recruitment at UMD and about prospective students’ and parents’ attitudes toward liberal education. See attached minutes for March 13, 2007.
• Met with Barb Beattie to learn more about the impact of liberal education requirements on students transferring to UMD. See attached minutes for March 13, 2007.
• Met with faculty from the Department of Composition (Jill Jenson, Head, and Ken Risdon, former head) in order to better understand the role of Composition within liberal education. See attached minutes for February 22, 2007.
• Gathered input from the UMD Professional Advising Team (PAT). Compilation of ideas and opinions attached.
• Compiled a list of liberal education programs at other universities, including peer institutions; reviewed relevant web sites and discussed pros and cons of some of those programs. List of programs, with urls, is attached.
• Read a significant body of current literature on the topic of liberal education reform (bibliography attached); discussed readings, culling some of the major points relevant to our charge.
• Reviewed and discussed additional data provided by VCAA regarding liberal education courses taken outside of major. Data sheets attached.
• Concluded the year’s work with two longer, retreat-like meetings in which we discussed revising the mission and/or model of liberal education at UMD. See attached minutes for May 9 and May 15, 2007.
• Developed an action plan for next fall. See final section of this report.

WHAT WE’VE LEARNED

FROM UMD:
1. We should work toward improving liberal education on this campus.
Based on the input we have gathered, we conclude that there is strong support for liberal education on the UMD campus; further, we believe there is genuine enthusiasm for improving upon the current program. There is some cynicism about the process by which such improvements will be envisioned and implemented: those who have heard much discussion and seen little action in this matter, on other campuses as well as our own, are understandably skeptical that anything significant will come of yet another liberal education initiative. Nevertheless, the judgment of the task force is that the UMD community as a whole is ready to begin moving toward redefining and reclaiming liberal education as an important part of our campus mission. The members of the task force look forward to working with our colleagues, and with campus leadership, in achieving that goal.

2. There is overall consensus that the current program either actually lacks coherence, or is presented in an incoherent manner, and that the meaning and value of liberal education is neither understood nor clearly communicated on the UMD Campus.
One recurring theme among UMD faculty, staff, and students is that the present program lacks coherence and that it is difficult for students and advisors to understand. Some of this criticism seems directed the 10-category distribution model itself, or at the way in which each of the categories is described. Some of the criticism seems directed more at the way in which the requirements are presented (e.g. “the blue sheet�?) and less at the model itself. Others who complain about the program’s incoherence really seem to mean that they don’t find the rationale for the details of this model clear or persuasive—or rather, that there is really is no meaningful rationale for the current program.
A related theme that we heard frequently here on campus is that no one really understands what is meant by “liberal education�? or why it is valued — not even those of us who do value it. The Task Force is concerned, but unsurprised, by this common complaint. We acknowledge that this is a serious problem, and agree that one of its most disturbing manifestations is the endlessly repeated assumption that liberal education is something to “get out of the way�? so that students can focus on the “real�? learning that is supposed to happen in college. As much as we lament this situation, we don’t think that the way to fix it is merely to do a better job of “selling�? liberal education. Rather, the idea of liberal education itself first needs to be rethought, and the campus needs to be involved in that process of rethinking. This will take time, resources, and considerable effort. One step in the direction of rethinking liberal education within the context of contemporary social reality is to make it possible for faculty, advisors, and academic administrators to engage more fully in the current, lively debate that is taking place nation-wide on this topic: to reach out to other campuses grappling with similar issues and to enrich the conversation on this campus by bringing the debate back home. Sending selected groups or individuals to relevant conferences, bringing speakers to this campus, hosting workshops, and conducting focus group sessions at UMD are means of fostering such engagement. We hope to recommend further initiatives that will contribute to this most important process of rethinking liberal education so that we can all believe in, and clearly communicate, its value at UMD.

FROM OUR READING: Some of the important points we have culled from our reading follow.
• Of the colleges and universities that have undertaken liberal education reform, those that have made the most significant changes also have experienced the most success and satisfaction with their reforms.
• Reforming liberal education requires a significant investment of time and resources; it also almost inevitably produces serious, long-standing divisions among faculty.
• At this time there are no data showing that any of the four standard models of general education (i.e., distribution, great books, surveys of “big�? ideas, and modes of inquiry) is more effective than the others in developing broader, life-long interests in students, a goal usually associated with liberal education. The key is not choosing the right model but selecting the best teachers for liberal education courses, and providing sufficient, sustained support for these members of the faculty.
• One of the problems with current debates about reforming the curriculum in higher education is that they tend to be “fixated�? on general education, which typically makes up only about one-third of the courses students take for the undergraduate degree. At least one expert urges that liberal education requirements be studied within the context of overall curricular requirements, most importantly the major. Meaningful reform of liberal education almost inevitably involves making changes in other parts of the curriculum.

FROM REVIEWING OTHER LIBERAL EDUCATION PROGRAM WEBSITES
We devoted one meeting to discussing liberal education programs at other institutions; the task force will probably want to look more closely at some of these models next fall. Observations made so far are as follows:
• Presentation matters. Whether a program is sleek and minimalist or enormously complex, how it is presented makes all the difference in the world. As UMD considers whether to make substantive changes to its liberal education program, it should pay very close attention to how that program is presented in its various print and digital forms for the various uses different groups will make of it. Students and advisors are probably the primary users for the online presentation and “the blue sheet�? (or what will be its equivalent in the future); parents tend to use the hard copy bulletin; and finally, faculty and administrators responsible for running the liberal education program need a different kind of presentation for their reference. Viewing other institutions’ online presentations of their liberal education programs really opened our eyes to how well—and how poorly—this can be done. UMD can do better.
• The terms “liberal education�? and “general education�? are often used in confused and confusing ways. While the two terms have been clearly and distinctly defined by organizations such as the AAC&U, in practice they are often used loosely, even interchangeably. The Liberal Education Task Force is aware of the need agree on specific understandings about what these two terms mean in relation to each other and to use the terms with precision, always recognizing that others may interpret them differently. The task force will come to an agreement about these terms at a future meeting.
• In many respects, the UMD liberal education program looks similar to programs at other institutions. Differences noticed by task force members include—
o Some institutions have core courses, plus distribution requirements. (At UMD Freshman Composition is the only “core.�?)
o Among UMD peer institutions, many have more writing requirements; a few have the same or less.

WHERE WE’LL GO FROM HERE
At the last meeting of the year, the Liberal Education Task Force discussed plans for Fall 2007 and agreed to work towards the following goals:
• To prepare, by December 1 2007, a slate of preliminary recommendations on how to reformulate liberal education at UMD.
• To develop a strategy for furthering discussion about those recommendations within all campus constituencies. These discussions will likely occur in a variety of formats (e.g. focus groups, workshops, guest speakers) and address specific topics (e.g., how accreditation requirements constrain and/or support the goals of liberal education).
• Review results of alumnae survey.