Transformed Core FAQs

No. Courses will not be listed in a Required Ways of Knowing menu and a Beneficence Cluster. This reinforces the distinctive goals of each component of the UCC structure. These two components fulfill different general education goals:

1. Required Ways of Knowing – Broad appeal courses, open to any and all students
   
   
2. Beneficence Clusters – Courses aligned with one of the three Ways of Knowing and the Beneficence Cluster theme as well as tailored for specific student interests. Cluster options should be welcoming to students from all disciplines.

This is ultimately a question for the Implementation Task Force and UCC Director. The UCC Task Force has developed a strong list of suggested clusters and recommends eight total, which includes one for transfer students and perhaps one for the Honors College. The UCC Task Force also recommends that cluster options be reviewed every five years to ensure they are meeting the needs of Ball State students in an evolving educational landscape.

Departments will present courses for approval in a process that is similar to what is done now for UCC approval, and the Implementation Task Force will develop a specific template with criteria and guidelines for creating proposals. This will be done in alignment with the standards for inclusion in the Ways of Knowing established by the ITF. Inclusion into a Beneficence Cluster will follow a similar process, abiding by the standards set by the UCC Director and the Implementation Task Force.

No. departments do not have to include current UCC classes in the new core.  The Handbook currently states that courses that have not run in two years need to be removed from the core. 

Also, current core classes that do not fit into the new UCC structure and clusters should be omitted or revised.

This course is intended to be an introductory course to Writing and Research skills and should focus on research-based writing. Colleges may continue to require students to take ENG 104 or may want to develop a more discipline-specific version of the course; however, this course should be available to all students, have no pre-requisites, and should not be designed for students in one particular major.  Colleges wishing to develop their own options for this requirement must collaborate with the UCC Director and the Writing Program Administrator.

This collaborative process will also ensure the development of shared SLOs for all courses fulfilling this requirement, regardless of where they are offered. These shared SLOs will ensure the development of a shared and transferable skill set in writing and research, regardless of the programmatic context in which they are developed. Colleges wishing to develop their own options for this requirement should design the course to focus primarily on research-based writing skills, address the shared SLOs, and be accessible to interested students regardless of their declared program of study.

Our current core has a clear assessment plan in place that works, and that can easily be implemented with the new core. The current Gen Ed assessment framework helps institute a culture of accountability, learning, and improvement, while accounting for the learning curves of faculty and staff involved with implementation.

In the recent accreditation visit by the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), peer reviewers made the following comments about our Gen Ed assessment practices:

• The general education assessment strategy was reviewed and revised in 2019 via a faculty driven process which resulted in a new strategy for assessing general education which is grounded in best practice.
• Assessment plans and institutional processes include both direct and indirect assessment measures, and annual reports include a section dedicated to closing the loop.
• It is very apparent that the culture of assessment is robust, and the institution is committed to assessing for learning and improvement.
• Resources for the development of assessment methodologies that follow best practices are ample.

The current UCC Task Force provides a few recommendations and considerations for the Implementation Task Force as its members begin their work:

• Given that all courses will have to (re)apply to be considered as part of the Ways of Knowing and Beneficence Clusters, programs have an opportunity to reconsider their current core courses and the ways they are delivered.
• When courses are designed and taught according to best pedagogical practices, they function as an antidote to faculty burnout and increase student success metrics (see HERE).
• A high percentage of students (both nationally and at BSU) report that the cost of educational materials are barriers to enrollment, success, and engagement.
• Support to adopt affordable materials, eBooks, reading lists, and OER materials is readily available at BSU. These measures can greatly increase student satisfaction, engagement, and retention.
• As such, the UCC Task Force recommends that all courses approved for the Beneficence Clusters can be delivered for $40 or less.
• The UCC Task Force also recommends that courses approved for the Beneficence Clusters are connected to the Director of High Impact Practices and the Career Center to better understand how they can prepare to tag their courses as HIPs or NACE.

The UCC Task Force strongly recommends that, immediately upon the appointment of the Implementation Task Force and the new UCC Director, they prioritize developing the guidelines and processes by which courses may be approved for both the Ways of Knowing and Beneficence Clusters.

The uniqueness of the “cluster” concept is an important selling point of Ball State’s proposed UCC. Thus, the UCC Task Force envisions faculty ambassadors or “champions” for each individual cluster, who would introduce advisors and new faculty to the transdisciplinary aims and objectives of each cluster. The champion would serve as a guide to faculty, encouraging best practices and ensuring that our UCC adheres to the highest pedagogical standards. During the implementation phases, cluster champions would assist in crafting positive messaging surrounding the transformed UCC, and would be instrumental in evaluating courses for inclusion in the curriculum. Beyond the implementation period, champions might serve as peer evaluators, assess achievement of course, cluster, and curriculum objectives, oversee revisions, and facilitate collaborative communication among disciplines represented in the cluster.