University Core of Common Studies Revision Process Core Revision Facilitation Group Lowell Barrington Sarah Bonewits Feldner Lars Olson John Su

What might success look like? Alumni able to articulate how the Core helped to prepare them for their post-Marquette opportunities Faculty, staff, and administrators able to articulate to prospective students and their parents how the Core delivers on our promise to provide a transformative education, meriting their significant financial investment

Marquette's revision process From the Provost and President (May 2015): Charge Roles and responsibilities Timeline

Charge for Core revision process Jesuit/Mission-centric Transformational Innovative Integrative Measurable/Assessable Transparent

Roles and responsibilities: what's distinctive to Marquette's process? Openness Transparency Proposals for frameworks will be solicited from campus, not restricted to a single committee All proposals will be reviewed by three representative bodies: CCRC UBUS UAS

Core revision process website Key documents from Provost and President Announcements of upcoming meetings, events, or other opportunities to provide input in process Research data from campus and from peer and aspirational institutions Opportunity to provide anonymous feedback

Timeline: goals for AY 2015-16 To discuss and design frameworks for the next Core (Campus community) To review and potentially endorse one or more framework proposals (CCRC, UBUS, UAS) To announce in May 2016 which framework will structure the next Core (Provost and President)

What's a framework? Distributional Sequential Theme-based or clustered Competency-based Tiered (e.g., first-year seminar/capstone or foundation/exploration)

To reach our May 2016 goal, what needs to happen this Fall? Campuswide survey #1: what's essential for all undergraduates to be able to do or know or experience because of completing the Core? (9/7-15) Campuswide conversations sponsored by colleges: using the data from survey #1 and research data, what learning outcomes should be associated with the Core? (9/21-10/23) Campuswide survey #2: Likert scale to evaluate the various learning outcomes proposed during campuswide conversations (10/26-30) The data collected from these surveys and conversations + research on best practices at peer and aspirational institutions (see Core revision website resources) will guide framework proposals

Next steps for faculty across colleges? Meetings with clusters of departments (9/21-10/23) Establishing cross-disciplinary working groups to talk about increasing integration and/or designing proposals for Core frameworks

What's exciting about Core revision? Increased integration through theme-based or paired courses Experiential learning components designed to connect academic work with co-curricular activities Increased depth and rigor through foundation/explorations or other sequential designs

How can we represent what the Core does? University of Santa Clara Rutgers University

What might success look like? Alumni are able to articulate how the Core helped to prepare them for their post- Marquette opportunities Faculty, staff, and administrators able to articulate to prospective students and their parents how the Core delivers on our promise to provide a transformative education, meriting their significant financial investment