Course Information

If a College objects to the offering of a course proposed by another College on the grounds that it duplicates or encroaches upon traditional subject matter, the steps described below are followed. All deadlines are working days and refer to the day on which the course was first presented to the University Course Review Committee (UCRC).

Apart from complying with the procedures and deadlines below, it is expected that faculty members, in a spirit of collegiality, will make every attempt to anticipate differences between departments before they appear at UCRC and resolve them informally whenever possible. If formal consultation is undertaken, members of the UCRC shall endeavor to expedite deliberations and keep their counterparts informed of progress and decisions within their college even before the deadline calls for formal notification, if that is possible.

1. At the meeting when the course first appears on the agenda of UCRC the objecting College will ask for consultation and request three documents from the other college – the "proposing college:" (a) a Course Proposal Consultative Process Form, (b) a Course Proposal Form, and (c) a course outline. The proposing college may provide these documents immediately and in fact should bring forms and outlines to the meeting if requests for consultation seem likely. The Curriculum Coordinator will record all requests for consultation. If formal consultation is requested, the course in question cannot be offered until and unless any dispute is resolved. If no consultation is requested at the meeting when the course is first presented to UCRC, it will be assumed that there are no objections to offering the course as described.
2. If consultation has been requested and the appropriate documents not already provided at the meeting, the proposing College will send these documents to the objecting College no later than the next working day after the Committee meets. As soon as possible, but no later than seven working days after the course was reviewed by UCRC, unless an extension is mutually agreed upon, the objecting College must return the completed Course Proposal Consultative Process Form to the proposing College. On the lower half of this form the objecting College will indicate whether or not it wants a formal consultation, and if so its objections to the course. The objecting College must also send a copy of this form to the Curriculum Coordinator. If the objecting College does not return the Course Proposal Consultative Process Form to the proposing College and a copy to the Curriculum Coordinator within the prescribed seven days, it will be presumed that there are no objections to the course.
3. If formal consultation is requested, the proposing department or program will respond in writing to the request as soon as possible but no later than 12 working days from the date the course was first considered by UCRC, unless an extension is mutually agreed upon. A copy of this response is also sent to the Curriculum Coordinator. If differences concerning the course still remain after the proposing department’s response, conversations between the departments should begin immediately. If the proposing department or program does not respond to a request for a formal consultation within the prescribed 12 days, it will be assumed that the proposal to offer the course has been withdrawn.
4. If consultation efforts between the departments are not successful within 22 working days of the meeting at which the course was first presented, or unless an extension is mutually agreed upon, the Dean of the College objecting to the course must send to the Undergraduate or Graduate Dean, in written form, the reasons for the objections. The Undergraduate or Graduate Dean will then attempt to bring the disputing parties to an agreement. If these attempts fail, the dispute shall be referred to the faculty committee described in Senate Policy S91-170, approved on April 30, 1991.

Course Classification System - Classification Descriptions

Course Classification System - Contact Hours Workload

The University implemented the current course numbering system in September 1971. This system provides a framework within which academic curricular units organize their course offerings. Certain numbers were designated for common course types across all academic areas (for example, 699 for undergraduate special study and 899 for graduate special study).

Summary of Currently Assigned Numbers

• 0–99: Remedial and other non-credit courses
• 100–699: Undergraduate-level courses
• 100–299: Lower-division courses
• 300–699: Upper-division courses
• 700–999: Graduate-level courses
• 700–899: Graduate courses (Master’s) and advanced credential courses
• 900–999: Joint doctoral courses

Reserved Numbers for Curriculum and Instruction

The numbers 650–659 are reserved for Curriculum and Instruction (C&I) courses.

Where there is only one C&I course, it must be numbered 650.

Topics Courses

Use the number of the approved generic course as follows:

Temporary courses

• Lower division: 274 (275)
• Upper division: 674 (675)
• Graduate level: 874 (875)

Experimental courses

• Lower division: 277 (278)
• Upper division: 677 (678)
• Graduate level: 877 (878)

Reserved Course Numbers

• 892: Internship / Site Administration (Master’s Program)
• 893: Written Creative Works (Master’s Program)
• 894: Creative Work Project (Master’s Program)
• 895: Field Study / Project (Master’s Program)
• 896: Directed Reading (Master’s Program)
• 697: Research (Undergraduate)
• 897: Research (Graduate)
• 898: Thesis (Master’s Thesis)
• 998: Dissertation (Doctoral Dissertation)
• 699: Special Study (Undergraduate)
• 899: Special Study (Graduate)
• XXXX: CEU

This format keeps all the information from the original while avoiding tables entirely.

Cross listing is a procedure that benefits students by giving them a choice of relevant prefixes under which to take a cross-listed course. It benefits faculty by giving them an opportunity to collaborate across disciplinary lines. It benefits departments and programs by increasing access to courses. Cross listing should be considered, however, 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. Cross listing should not be used simply as a tool for resolving differences or opposition between or among departments over their respective offerings or perhaps similar but by no means identical courses.

Guidelines for cross-listing courses are:

1. Course proposals and outlines must be identical in title, prerequisites, description, outline, classification, units, grading practice, and number of times a course may be taken for credit. The course number may differ for each prefix, as long as all numbers are at the same level (lower division, upper division, graduate). Each 40 word description must end with: "Also offered as [cross-listed prefix and number]. Students may not take the course a second time under an alternate prefix." [If the course is repeatable for credit, substitute "students may only re-take the course under the same prefix as before."]
2. Generic courses and their variants are not eligible for cross listing.
3. When two or more departments/programs agree to cross-list a course:
   • a.  They shall contact each other every semester to determine if one or another wishes to offer the course in the following semester’s schedule. The schedules of all parties must reflect any offering of the course.
   • b.  They shall have the option of staffing the course in alternating sequence. One party may forgo their "turn" in any given semester, and defer that turn until the next semester in which it wishes to offer the course.
   • c. They shall not offer all the courses in the same semester, unless the offering of multiple sections are agreed upon by all parties.
   • d. Each shall choose its own instructor for the course when it is its "turn" (unless prior agreement has been reached to choose instructors in concert).
   • e. They shall never make changes in the course title, prerequisites, description, outline, classification, units, grading practice, or number of times it may be taken without the complete agreement of the other party/parties.
   • f. Each shall notify all other participating departments if it is contemplating withdrawing from a cross-listing arrangement subsequent to the course being approved.
4. Students have the option signing up under any prefix when the course is offered (except if the course is being repeated for credit). All FTES is returned to the department/program that is funding the instructor.

Grading Basis (XLS)

Grading System Key

A. Department /Program and College Guidelines

The major responsibility for curriculum development and revision rests with the faculty who offer the specific program. It is recommended that each department/program and College form a curriculum committee to review and approve courses. The following questions should be addressed at both the department/program and College levels to determine if new and revised courses meet University guidelines.

1. Does the title properly reflect the content of the course? Does the abbreviated title (used for Class Schedule and student transcripts) clearly and adequately identify the course?
2. Is the description of the course (which must be 40 words or fewer) carefully worded to reflect the intent and content of the course?
3. Is the course outline complete and clear in terms of objectives, content, experiences, requirements, and evaluation? Are the course objectives consistent with the award of University level credit? Are the criteria for grading stated clearly, sufficiently related to course objectives, and both rigorous and fair?
4. Does the proposed number reflect the level of the course?
5. Are the prerequisites appropriate and clearly stated (particularly for upper division and graduate courses)? (See Course Proposal Form, items 8a and 8e.)
6. Upper division courses must have prerequisites.
7. If it is a generic course, does the description include, "Topic to be specified in Class Schedule?"
8. If the course requires enrollment concurrently with another course, does it include the statement, "Must be taken concurrently with ____. Students may not take this course a second time under an alternate prefix". (See Course Proposal Form, items 8b and 8e.)
9. If the course is cross-listed, does it clearly state, "Also offered as ___" in both descriptions? See Course Proposal Form, items 8c and 8e.)
10. If the course is paired, is it clearly stated in both course descriptions? Are the staffing classifications identical? (See Course Proposal Form, items 8d and 8e, and consult Academic Senate Policy S90-126, Policy on Paired Courses.)
11. If the proposed course can be repeated for credit, are the number of times and/or the total number of units that can be earned reasonable? The course description must include a statement, "May be repeated for credit ‘X’ times" or "May be repeated for credit ‘X’ times when topic varies." (See Course Proposal Form, items 8e and 10c.)
12. Is the unit value proposed appropriate for the expectations of the course (e.g., learning to be gained, contact hours planned, and required experiences)?
13. Is the proposed grading method appropriate for the type of class and is it consistent with the University grading policy? (See Course Proposal Form, item 9.)
14. Will the proposed staffing classification achieve the stated objectives of the course? Is it consistent with the systemwide usage for lower and upper division or graduate level courses?
15. In light of the University policy which specifies that every department/program shares the responsibility that all written work meet literacy standards, is the writing component appropriate to the content of the course and has provision for the development of writing skills been included in the course outline?
16. Is the department/program appropriate to offer the course? Is there any evidence that the material covered in the course will inappropriately overlap or encroach upon the interests of other departments/programs in the College or in any other College? If so, has consultation taken place? (See Course Proposal Form, item 11.)
17. Has the appropriate consideration been given to assessing how the course fits into the total curriculum of the department/program?
18. If the course directly affects the curriculum of the department/program, has a curriculum change proposal been developed for consideration as an integral part of this review and approval process? (New or revised courses that directly affect or change the curriculum must be accompanied by a request to change the program.)
19. Is there evidence of sufficient student demand or need to make the course viable? Is it likely that the course can be offered with sufficient student demand at least once every two years?
20. If the course is a new one, has the department/program considered dropping another course with infrequent offerings?
21. Is there adequate space to house the course? Does the course require any special equipment?
22. What demand does the proposed course make on the current resources of the College? What will be the continued or projected demand on College resources?
23. Is the proposed implementation date appropriate for the needs of the program and does it allow enough time to complete the review/approval process?
24. Have all relevant blanks on the course proposal form been completed, including all signatures?

B. Academic Affairs Review and Approval Process

The office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs has three major roles to play in the course review/approval process. They are: (1) to provide logistical support for the processing the proposed course forms both before and after being considered by the University Course Review Committee (UCRC); (2) to provide the College Deans/Associate Deans with professional staff reactions regarding the courses before consideration by the UCRC; and (3) to assist with the scheduling and offering of courses recommended for approval by the UCRC and approved by the Undergraduate/Graduate Dean as designees of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs.

To assure control and continuity, the Curriculum Coordinator is assigned the responsibility of coordinating the process from the time a course is received from the College Dean/Associate Dean until it is officially approved and placed in publications of the University.

1. The Curriculum Coordinator is responsible for:
   • a. Returning courses to the College Deans/Associate Deans that are received beyond the deadline date or are found to be incomplete as submitted. (Arrangements may be made to hold late courses for consideration in a subsequent semester.)
   • b. Conducting a routine check to ensure that:
     • There are no obvious omissions in the information needed to process the course.
     • The proposed course number is consistent with the approved course numbering system.
     • The course description is appropriately worded in no more that 40 words.
     • The title of the course is of reasonable length and consistent with the intent of the course as suggested by the description and the proposed course classification.
     • The abbreviated course title clearly and adequately identifies the course
       
       content.
     • Prerequisites are properly stated and placed in the description.
     • The proposed staffing classification is appropriate for the level, purpose, and method of instruction.
     • Any limitation placed on the number of times the course can be repeated for credit, or on the maximum number of units a student can earn in the course, is properly stated in the course description.
     • The course proposal form is signed by the appropriate individuals.
   • c. Placing the course on the agenda of UCRC.
   • d. Forwarding the course to the Undergraduate or Graduate Dean for review.
2. The Undergraduate or Graduate Dean is expected to review the course as far in advance of the UCRC meeting as possible. Any concerns or questions should be communicated to the appropriate College representative. If the question or concerns are not addressed before the meeting, the Undergraduate or Graduate Dean has the responsibility for seeing that they are addressed before the course receives final approval.
3. After action by the Undergraduate/Graduate Dean, or his/her designee, the Curriculum Coordinator will transmit copies of the course form to the appropriate offices.
4. The Curriculum Coordinator is also responsible for transmitting new or revised course information to those responsible for preparing the Class Schedule, Bulletin, and similar publications of the University.

C. University Course Review Committee

The University Course Review Committee (UCRC) is charged with the responsibility for reviewing all new and substantively revised courses. It is expected that the primary attention of this committee will be directed to concerns involving substantial duplication or overlap. Per the Senate Guiding Principles:

• 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.

Other concerns regarding the quality of the course as reflected in the course outline, description, title, units, grading method, etc., should be brought to the attention of the College representative if it is apparent that they have not been addressed earlier in the review/approval process. All new or substantially revised courses proposed for General Education must first complete the UCRC consultative process before being considered for General Education approval by the General Education Council.

The UCRC membership is to include a designated representative, typically the Associate Dean, from each of the eight Colleges, and the Associate Dean of Extended Learning. The Undergraduate/Graduate Dean or his/her designee, serves as chair. Staff from the Office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs attend meetings and provide resource assistance as may be needed.

The UCRC typically meets once a month during the academic year, with weekly meetings during the peak periods. A special meeting schedule may be arranged by the committee for the Winter Session and/or Summer Session periods.