Recorder: Mark Morey

Present:  Greg Auleta, Marybeth Bell, Joan Carroll, Jean Chambers, Diane Chepko-Sade, Bill Goffe, John Huonker, Michael LeBlanc, and Mark Morey

Regrets: Sue Camp and Robert Irwin (who also provided e-mail input) sent regrets for not being able to make the meeting.

1)      The minutes of the meeting on March 8, 2006, were approved.

2)      We discussed the issue of course prerequisites including what some of the other SUNY campuses are doing.  John Huonker volunteered to edit and improve our draft of a memo to be sent to the Academic Policies Committee regarding our recommendations supporting the clarification and automatic enforcement of course prerequisites through the registration system.

3)      The Committee discussed the “Progress Report to Faculty Assembly” that Jean had drafted and suggested some minor editorial changes.  She will present it at the meeting later today.

4)      Since Nikki Bomasuto has left the College, Jean will contact Michael Ameigh to see about a replacement member for the AQC.  Jean Chambers brought up the idea of replacing her as the chair of the AQC but graciously agreed to stay on given the promises of support and assistance from the other members present.

5)      We held a discussion of possible initiatives for the AQC.

1. Since the Faculty Assembly has established a new taskforce dealing with writing across the curriculum, we agreed that the AQC is in support of that effort and request that we have a seat on that taskforce for an AQC member.  Further, Jean Chambers will forward a folder of materials that she has collected on the issue to the taskforce.
2. The AQC is interested in the concept of assessment as it relates to academic quality and in comparison to the concept of evaluation. We briefly discussed Collegiate Learning Assessment as one example of relevant developments in the field, and Mark Morey promised to provide the AQC with some materials for consideration on the broad issue of assessment for our next meeting.
3. We brought up and briefly discussed the possibility of an initiative to clarify and improve the policy on repeating courses as it relates to academic quality.
4. We briefly discussed the faculty and student reward structures and imbalances that exist in regard to important issues of quality.  One topic mentioned within this discussion was the possibility of requirements for “in-service” or “continuing education” experiences for faculty.
5. Finally, our list of possible initiatives included a thrust on quality of student reading within the more broadly defined literacy issue.

The meeting closed at 12 noon.  Our next meeting is scheduled for 2:30 pm on April 26 in Room 123 in the library.