BIOL 217, BIOLOGY OF SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES: This course is designed to create an awareness of the importance of biotic interactions, technological advances, and scientific developments with respect to human sexually transmitted diseases and their impact on human existence. Materials provided by the supported that the course topic and content would be appropriate, however several concerns were noted. Although the syllabus provided a course description, course objectives were not specified. Further, only one of the two instructors of the course submitted materials for review. Therefore, it was not possible to compare course content in the two sections. The discussion which attempted to link the course with other goals of the General Education Program (e.g., basic skills) did not provide information on assessment procedures. Further, no discussion was provided on the relationship between the range of assessment procedures and how those procedures are used to determine that students have mastered the content and competencies specified in the relevant General Education Criteria. The course fails to meet the Special Topics in Science and Technology criteria regarding class size and format. On average 50 students were enrolled in each of the three sections of this course in the spring of 1996. Based on the materials provided, the course is recommended for recertification as a G.E. course, but the Committee notes that the large lecture format is contrary to the stated requirements for the course (see Category comments and recommendations below).

CHEM 105, CHEMICALS IN THE ENVIRONMENT: This course deals with current issues of air, water, and soil pollution, waste management and household chemicals, cosmetics and other chemicals, and their social impacts. Questionnaires, syllabi, and related materials were submitted for two full-time faculty teaching the course. A part-time instructor also taught the course in the fall quarter but no materials were requested or submitted of the individual as such “departmental duties” are not part of the employment terms for part-timers. The Chair questionnaire states that the part-time instructor’s approach is similar to that of the other two faculty, however. The Committee would emphasize that in the absence of part-time instructor materials, it is important for the Department to ensure that coverage and rigor of such instructor’s section or sections is consistent with those of full time faculty. The full time faculty make use of the same text, and from the materials submitted appear to provide comparable course coverage. The syllabi and related materials present clear explanation of course requirements and expectations, although there is no statement of course goals or objectives with respect to student learning outcomes. Although originally instituted as a seminar, the course has expanded to large-lecture size with a 72-student cap which it is reported is regularly reached. In response to the large enrollments, one instructor utilizes multiple choice mid-term and final exams, both of which offer a bonus written question. The other instructor utilizes shorter mid-term and finals based mainly on short answer questions. Both instructors require a short paper whose requirements suggest that they serve to build written communication and critical thinking skills. From the materials submitted, the Committee believes the material of this course is appropriate for its section and that it should be recertified as a G.E. course, but notes that the large-lecture format clearly is contrary to the stated G.E. size requirement (see Category comments and recommendations below).