In January 2016, I was appointed to chair the Provost’s Commission on the Undergraduate Experience (CUE), which was a faculty-led effort to assess and improve undergraduate education and the residential campus experience.  The work of the CUE was to recommend the path forward for undergraduate education at CWRU.

The full charge to the CUE is available below, but in general, the CUE was expected to:

• Develop and articulate a philosophy and approach for advancing CWRU’s undergraduate experience including SAGES and general education requirements.
• Explore how CWRU’s residential environment could better support learning and provide a more intellectually vibrant experience for undergraduate students.
• Engage with those who will help CWRU understand external perceptions of CWRU’s undergraduate programs and how any changes that may implemented would be perceived.

In May 2018, the CUE submitted its final report to the Provost; in September 2018, the report was released to the campus (see this article).

---

CUE Reports & Documents

Please note: you will need a CWRU Network ID/Password to access these files.

Charge to the CUE (January 12, 2016)

Initial Feedback Shared with the CUE via online survey – (Spring 2016)

CUE Progress Report 1 (October 7, 2016) CUE Framework Philosophy – included in Progress Report (October 7, 2016)

CUE Goals for the Undergraduate Experience (January 24, 2017) – revision of Framework Philosophy dated October 7, 2016

CUE Progress Report 2, revised (March 14, 2017) – revised to include CUE Undergraduate Student Advisory Group discussion list, which was inadvertently left out of the initial report dated March 10, 2017 CUE Goals for the Undergraduate Experience (February 22, 2017) – included in Progress Report CUE Thinking Groups (March 13, 2017) – included in Progress Report, updated with final group members

CUE Update (May 15, 2017)

CUE Thinking Group Reports (May 22, 2017)

General Feedback Shared with the CUE Undergraduate Student Advisory Group Email List – Archive (Feb-Dec 2017)

Enhancing the Undergraduate Experience: Preliminary Recommendations for the CWRU Community (September 29, 2017) – NOTE: This file was updated on Oct. 17, 2017, to correct hyperlinks that were non-functional; the report’s content remains the same. Observer Editorial (10/13/17) – “Lack of Campus Identity Makes It Harder to Find” PPT Slides – Overview of the Preliminary Recommendations (Nov. 16, 2017)

Feedback on the CUE’s Preliminary Recommendations Notes from Feedback Sessions (October 2017) Individual Feedback, sent via email (F2017-2018) Preliminary Recommendations Feedback Survey (Winter 2017-18) Formal written feedback submitted to FSCUE/CUE (January 2018)

Faculty Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education – Student Life Sub Committee Spring 2018 Focus Group Summary

Cultivating Community:Strengthening the Undergraduate Experience at CWRU (May 31, 2018) Undergraduate Schools & the College – Recent Activity Related to the CUE’s Work (May 25, 2018)

Full CUE Archive (includes all documents above) – PDF of >600 pages

Case Daily: “A Single University: CUE issues final recommendations for undergraduate experience” (public) Announcement of Final Report to Faculty by President Snyder & Provost Vinson (Sept. 10, 2018)

---

 

CUE Thinking Groups: Overview & Co-Chairs

For more information, please see the document “CUE Thinking Groups” listed under “CUE Reports and Documents” above.

GER Thinking Group: Lee Thompson & Marc Buchner
The GER Thinking Group is charged with assessing how well the current undergraduate curriculum meets the University’s goals and aspirations. This group will focus primarily on the current General Education Requirements (GERs) of the University and those portions of the disciplinary curricula that are meant to provide breadth within the undergraduate experience. The final recommendations of this group will include identifying elements of the GER/curriculum that are working well (and therefore should be kept) and those that are flawed in their implementation (and therefore should be modified).

Pedagogy Thinking Group: Blanton Tolbert & Irena Kenneley
The Pedagogy Thinking Group is charged with identifying best practices for delivering undergraduate education, focusing in particular on innovative educational practices that are congruent with the University’s goals and aspirations. The final recommendations of this group will include conclusions about educational models, academic calendar & scheduling structures, and assessment practices best-suited to CWRU for developing the qualities we seek in our graduates.

Advising & Mentoring Thinking Group: Frank Merat & Kathleen Horvath
The Undergraduate Advising & Mentoring Thinking Group is charged with using available assessment data about the current status of advising/mentoring on campus and making proposals for the future of undergraduate advising at CWRU, as it should be configured to meet the University’s goals and aspirations. This includes examining the structures and practices of academic advising, career and post-college planning, and other forms of mentoring/advising of undergraduate students (with consideration of the numbers of students in particular programs).

Experiential Learning Thinking Group: Jerrold Scott & Jennifer Johnson
The Experiential Learning Thinking Group is charged with assessing the current status and making proposals for the future of experiential learning activities at CWRU, as those activities support the University’s goals and aspirations. This group will consider the wide variety of experiential learning activities our students pursue (for example: research & creative activity, service learning, community engagement, international experiences, co-ops, internships & practicum experiences). It will make recommendations about whether and how those activities should be integrated into the academic and co-curricular programs of CWRU undergraduates.

Campus Culture & Environment Thinking Group: Hope Barkoukis & Timothy Beal
The Campus Culture & Environment Thinking Group is charged with identifying strengths and making recommendations to address weaknesses and exploit opportunities in the current campus culture and community environment. This group will consider questions of inclusion and diversity, campus climate, student workload and time commitments, wellness, and school spirit.

---