We encourage everyone to consult with their ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan Faculty Fellows during the course proposal process. Contact the Office of Liberal Education for further assistance or if you would like to meet.
The CIM system has been updated to reflect the ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan 2023. All submissions and revisions should go through CIM directly. Here are things to consider as you craft your submission and before submitting anything in CIM:
Faculty should not submit ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan course proposals without consulting with their MP Faculty Fellow and/or their Chair/CDA/Curriculum Committee for the "curricular ecology" view of any individual program or department’s broader course offerings. It is not about shoehorning existing courses into the new ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan. Rather, it's about meaningful curricular revisions and targeting a small number of regularly offered courses for inclusion.
We strongly recommend courses only carry a total of 2 ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan designations such as Signature Inquiry and Humanities, or Global Inquiry and Social Science. Multiple designations can be confusing for students, prospers, and reviewers alike.
Consult the Office of Liberal Education website FAQs, the general course proposals page, and the specific MP area proposal pages:
Note especially the sections labeled “Proposal Criteria.” Consult with OLE staff on appropriateness and clarity of submission and/or unique steps.
Design or revise the syllabus and assignments to align with the Pillars and ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan SLOs. Courses submitted to the MP should be “fully formed” and must include a syllabus where course topics and the amount of time spent on them are clear. Specific assignments and activities are used in CIM to explain how the Pillars and SLOs are met. When asked for “syllabus language” in CIM, it is most efficient to copy/paste directly from the syllabus into the CIM text box.
In your submissions, it is always best to think of two distinct audiences for the required materials: The CIM text-box responses are for faculty (LEC) and record-keeping (Office of LIberal Education), while the syllabus is for students. Thus the syllabus is different from the CIM text box responses in both audience and genre. The syllabus is an outward-facing, student-oriented document that should show students what they will actually learn in your class, and it plays an important role in telling the MP "story" by reiterating and linking specific parts of the MP narrative for students. The CIM responses are for Liberal Education Council review, Office of Liberal Education records, and documentation that courses are meeting MP outcomes.
Departments that would like to submit a course for approval are encouraged to consult with the Office of Liberal Education staff in advance to receive support and feedback. Faculty proposers or departments are encouraged to schedule an appointment.
When a course is submitted in CIM, it goes through a “workflow” that includes your Chair, AS Deans, Compliance, Registrar, the Office of Liberal Education. Once the OLE receives a submission the proposer will be notified, and it is passed to the LEC for review. The LEC conducts regular reviews of proposals on a rotating basis, approximately every two weeks; proposers will be notified of the review timeline. All courses are evaluated by at least two members of the LEC, and written feedback will be provided for all proposals. The full LEC will then make a recommendation for approval, rejection, or revision.
The ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan course review process conducted by the LEC is the first step in institutional curricular assessment required by HLC. Thus standards have gone up, and proposals do require thought and attention to detail: Proposals require a holistic course design rather than “bits and pieces.”
The Syllabus is outdated (e.g. refers to old Global ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plans, LEAP competencies, old Pillars).
The Syllabus or assignment descriptions are incomplete. NOTE: LEC does not look at classroom policies or administrative details; rather, they look at course content, breakdown of units/topics, and assignments. Especially important is a description/narrative of how the Four Pillars are present in the narrative and how learning objectives are described to students and incorporated into course content.
Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) are not adequately contextualized and described with specific pedagogy and assignments. For each ¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒ Plan SLO, the proposer must show how a specific assignment helps students attain the outcome. It must be clear to faculty who may be outside of your discipline. While reviewers will be in a cognate area, clarity is still key.
For questions regarding the Curriculum Management System (CIM), contact the Registrar (courseapproval@¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒOH.edu).
For questions regarding MP and Thematic Sequences, contact Leighton C. Peterson, (lpeterson@¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒOH.edu).
For questions regarding Advanced Writing requirements, contact Elizabeth Wardle (wardleea@¾Ã¾ÃË®ÃÛÌÒOH.edu).
| Proposals Received By: | Will Be Reviewed By: |
|---|---|
| 1/17/25 | 1/28/25 |
| 1/24/25 | 2/4/25 |
| 1/31/25 | 2/11/25 |
| 2/7/25 | 2/18/25 |
| 2/14/25 | 2/25/25 |
| 2/21/25 | 3/4/25 |
| 2/28/25 | 3/11/25 |
| 3/7/25 | 3/18/25 |
| 3/21/25 | 4/1/25 |
| 3/28/25 | 4/8/25 |
| 4/1/25 | 4/15/25 |
| 4/8/25 | 4/22/25 |
| 4/15/25 | 4/29/25 |
| 4/22/25 | 5/6/25 |