General Education Transfer Module

Discussion at E.O.U. on 10/15/2004

 

Below are a list of questions brought up during the GETM meeting at EOU together with a brief synopsis of the discussion. Taken by Steve Tanner

 

 

QUESTION:

Since each school can have it’s own “add-ons” to the GETM, have we really accomplished anything?  Every school will say “What he have is what we want” and the 45 credit module will just wind up being tacked on to what each school already has.  Won’t transfer students still run into the same problems they do now needing to take additional GenEds?

 

DISCUSSION:

The GETM is basically the GenEd part of the AAOT and is designed to work as a sort of mini-AAOT.  Meeting the GETM at one institution counts as meeting it at all institutions.  It is a module designed to be transcripted as whole.  While there may be add-ons, the GenEd transfer problem will at least be lessened.

 

A related question brought up during the discussion was that part of the problem, in fact, may be the name – since each university refers to “General Education”, why isn’t it the same everywhere?  Should we carefully and deliberately make a distinction between GenEd (the GETM) and “Institutional Requirements” specific to the missions of each separate institution?

 

 

 

QUESTION:

Why is Math in “Foundational Skills” and in “Intro to Disciplines”?  Do we really want students with 3 computer science classes at a Community College to satisfy a whole Science/Math/CS requirement?  The AAOT requires a “Lab Science”.  Would the GETM?

 

ANSWER:

The GETM is taken from the AAOT and these are the requirements of the AAOT.

 

 

 

QUESTION:

The GETM would make Community College advising even more crucial.  Since this sort of advising is already frequently lacking, what plans are their for additional resources?  If the program is implemented it is realistic to have better advising in place by Fall of 2005?  Is it even possible for “swirling” students to get good advising?

 

DISCUSSION:

At the very least a “swirling” student should have his/her attention focused on GenEd by the existence of the GETM.  Specifics about how to implement better CC advising are not yet addressed, but the sense is they will be critical if the GETM is to succeed.

 

 

 

QUESTION:

How will OUS schools decide which courses will meet their own GETM?

 

DISCUSSION:

This is a problem that has not yet been considered.  Presumably it will have to be addressed by each school separately should when the GETM is in place.  This could require a good deal of work.

 

 

 

QUESTION:

What about non-traditional students?  Will courses from years ago count as their modern equivalents toward the GETM?

 

This should work in the same way as does the AAOT.

 

 

 

OTHER DISCUSSION POINTS:

 

The Arizona legislature has apparently done exactly what we are trying to avoid compelling the Oregon legislature to do.  This could be worth looking in to, if nothing else as a motivator.

 

The E.O.U. Distance Education program already has many useful things in place – Links to each of the CCs courses and how they transfer to EOU GenEd (but not the courses that make up their AAOT), and major-by-major requirements.