1. We endorse the basic operating procedures of the
University Course Review Committee (UCRC) as presently structured with the exception of
the appeal process, for which we recommend the change cited in #7. We recommend that the
UCRC not play a decision-making role (i.e., that it not continue as at present).
2. The prime determiners of course content, appropriateness,
relevance, criteria, and need reside at the department/program and College levels.
3. The major purpose for University-wide review of new and
revised courses is to address the balance between the need to encourage faculty creativity
in curricular development and incorporate emerging developments in disciplines on the one
hand, and the need to maintain the integrity of established academic units (e.g.,
programs, and Colleges) on the other. Therefore,
a. New or revised courses cannot substantially duplicate
already existing ones. The data for determining "substantial duplication" should
include but not be limited to reading lists, topics covered and disciplinary perspectives
on the material.
b. In cases where no "substantial duplication" of
an already existing course occurs, but the new or revised course is alleged to represent a
new area or field for the proposing discipline/department/program which overlaps the area
of the objecting discipline/ department/program, consultation between the two units is
necessary. Modification of the new or revised course may be necessary to maintain the
integrity of the units involved.
c. The appeal committee shall decide to accept an appeal only
in cases where serious and careful consultation has not resolved the conflict; otherwise
the committee shall return the issue to the appropriate deans for further consultation and
resolution.
4. Cross-listing should be considered only when two or more
appropriate departments, each with valid claims to a given subject matter, genuinely wish
to collaborate on the offering of an identical course. Should a department wish to
withdraw from a cross-listing arrangement subsequent to the course being approved, the
UCRC should develop procedures that would guarantee prompt notification to all departments
concerned that such a withdrawal is being contemplated. (See Guidelines, III, 3f)
7. Disputes arising at the time the course is initially
proposed, substantially revised, or during the period of offering, which cannot be
resolved between departments and/or Colleges with the assistance of the
undergraduate/graduate dean, shall be referred for final adjudication to a faculty
committee to which the President has delegated responsibility for resolving such disputes.
The committee will be comprised of one teaching faculty representative from each College
and one Library representative, elected by the faculty of the College/Library, with the
Dean of the Undergraduate Studies (undergraduate courses) or Dean of the Graduate Division
(graduate courses) as an ex-officio non-voting member. Further, one
teaching faculty member from each department involved in the dispute will be
included when the course is being considered by the appeal committee. These individuals
will not be members of the committee. Committee members will serve two-year terms that
overlap for the purpose of continuity. All appeal committee meetings will be open.