King L. CHOW Director Undergraduate Core Education Office, HKUST

12 June 2012

Chi-Kwong LI The College of Williams and Mary, U.S.A 2010-11 Fulbright Scholar, HKUST

2

Building a Common Core Program

from the scratch

vs

Migrating a Common Core Program

from an existing establishment

General Education in Pre-2010 Era at HKUST

□ 12 credits from School of Humanity and Social Science

□ 6 credits outside the enrolling School

□ Out of 120 credits, i.e., 12-18%

□ A distribution model with no well-defined objectives

□ Broadening is the theme

□ Very much school-initiated without any central coordination

3

Common Core Program with Clear Goals, Objectives & ILOs

□ Spark passion for learning, broaden horizons and liberate the

mind

□ Develop communication and analytical capacity and independent thinking

□ Foster appreciation of arts and culture, social issues, and scientific and technological precision

□ Encourage inquiry and ability to work as a team

□ Cultivate responsible, ethical and compassionate citizenship

□ Ensure balanced physical and intellectual growth

Cultivating open minded, civilized and responsible intellects who know what they are after in their lives.

4

The Framework of Common Core Program

Humanities (H) 3 credits

Social Analysis (SA) 3 credits

Science and Technology (S&T) 3 credits

Quantitative Reasoning (QR) 3 credits

School-Sponsored Courses (SSCs) 9 credits *

Common Core Electives 6 credits **

English Communication 6 credits ***

Chinese Communication 3 credits

Healthy Lifestyle 0 credit

36 credits in 7 broad areas: (out of a total of 120 credits for the degree program, i.e., 30%)

* 3 credits each from S&T SSCs, SA SSCs, and H SSCs ** To be selected from the H, SA, S&T, QR, or Arts common core areas *** Must be taken in Year One

5

General Criteria for Common Core Courses

□ The course should broaden students’ horizon and their exposure.

□ The course should NOT have a prerequisite and should be open to ALL students.

□ The course should enhance students’ competencies such as communication, quantitative reasoning, and critical thinking.

□ The course should challenge students to consider social, cultural, or philosophical issues with a connection to the subject matter

6

Migration of Existing GE courses (1)

Why?

• Avoid running two parallel systems (GE vs Common Core) in 2012

• Prefer an early migration to phase in the Common Core (2010)

• Current students can also benefit from new common core course development

7

School-based GE Requirement 12-18 credits, including:

12 credits from courses taught by School of Humanities & Social Science 6 credits from courses outside student’s enrolling School

Migration of Existing GE courses (2)

Process

• Convert school-based GE requirement into common core requirement through a rough one-to-one mapping mechanism

(Took effect from Fall 2010)

8

School-based GE Requirement Common Core Areas

Science Science & Technology

Engineering Science & Technology

Business Social Analysis

Social Science Social Analysis

Humanities Arts & Humanities

Migration of Existing GE courses (3)

• All existing GE courses went through a two-stage course re-orientation exercise

• Stage 1: 290 courses (2010 summer)

• A quick screening to identify courses that are unlikely to be migrated

• Based on course syllabus and a statement explaining alignment of course ILOs with area ILOs submitted by departments

• ~40 courses dropped at the end of Stage 1

• Stage 2: 249 courses (2010-2012)

• Departments need to submit a detailed course proposal

• An in-depth review of each proposal by a Course Review Panel (CRP) to confirm the alignment of course content, teaching pedagogies and

assessment with the course ILOs; and the alignment of course ILOs with common core area ILOs

9

CRP

• Review Proposal

• Feedback/Suggestions to Course Developer to Improve the Proposal

Course Developer

• Feedback/Modified Proposal from Course Developer

CRP • Endorsement of Modified Proposal by CRP

CUS & CUCE

• Clearance of Other Issues by CUS Secretariat (e.g. course code, concurrence etc.)

• Endorsement of Course Proposal by CUS and CUCE

Submit Course Proposal to UCEO

via Schools

Submit to Senate for information

10

The Course Review Process – stage 2

• Normally a 2-month process from receiving the proposal to getting it ready for CUS & CUCE endorsement assuming that only one round of feedback and modification

Migration of Existing GE courses (4)

Outcome

• Stage-2 review completed in May 2012

• 158 courses successfully migrated to be common core courses

• ~90 courses dropped at the end of Stage 2

• ~130 courses dropped during the migration process

11

GE courses going through

Stage-2 migration

249

GE courses to be migrated

290

Courses migrated

successfully

158

41

Stage-1

Drop-outs

91

Stage-2

Drop-outs

*Introduction of new courses

School Sponsored Courses (SSC) [23]

Newly developed interdisciplinary courses [ 62]

Practicum Arts courses [12]

Half of them were sponsored by additional funding from UGC and University budget.

12

Approved Common Core Courses (new + migrated) (As at May 2012)

Common Core Area

No. of Courses

Non-SSC SSC Total

Humanities 103 3 106

Social Analysis 63 10 73

Science & Technology 41 10 51

Quantitative Reasoning 13 -- 13

Arts 32 -- 32

English Communication 2 -- 2

Chinese Communication 5 -- 5

Total 259 23 282 *

13

* The total number will be 254 after excluding 28 courses that are cross-listed in 2 areas

Migration of Existing GE courses (5)

Challenges

• Adopting the OBE approach in proposal preparation

• Designing courses to serve ILOs of the common core areas, not major programs nor instructors’ research interests

• Re-instating purpose of the review process – not about rigor of academic content, but about alignment of ILOs; not about disapproving courses, but offering feedback and suggestions to facilitate development of courses in a coherent way to serve the common core

• A long process, often involving multiple rounds of feedback from CRP and course modifications by instructors over a period of 2-6 months.

Success Factor: Shared understanding of the stance, criteria and process of the review among CRP members, and all members are dedicated to serve on independent, personal capacity; not to defend courses submitted by their School/Department

14

Arts Education Development

• An exceptional effort for a technical university to implement such an initiative

• Study of arts has special value to HKUST students:

• Help them see things from other perspectives

• Learn to seek answers to questions and express their thoughts in a creative manner

• Foster appreciation of arts and culture and develop an aesthetic sense

• A platform for nurturing personal growth

• Arts components in the common core have these ILOs

• Appreciate the theory, history and practice of the arts

• Express themselves through various art forms or media

• Target at a wide range of art forms

• Visual Arts (Photography, Drawing, Painting, Calligraphy, Installation Art, Architecture)

• Performing Arts (Music, Drama, Theater, Cantonese Opera, Contemporary Dance, Chinese Dance)

• Media Art (Film Art, Single/Multi-Channel Video Art, Design, Web Design)

• Interdisciplinary Art

15

16

Coordinated Efforts Joint efforts of the School of Humanities and Social Science (SHSS), the Undergraduate Core Education Office (UCEO), the Center for the Arts (CFA), and the Student Affairs Office (SAO) to formulate, coordinate and launch the Art Curriculum

SHSS UCEO CFA/SAO

Credit-bearing arts courses

- Theory-based arts courses (At introductory level if offered for the common

core, or as non-common-core if at higher level)

Lead -- --

- Studio arts courses (common core , at introductory level)

Lead

Co-curricular Workshops -- Lead

Other arts workshops, events, activities -- Lead Lead

Courses/Activities cover a wide spectrum of art areas/forms

>1000

>300

>1000

Examples of Arts Courses

Studio Arts Courses [Coordinated by the UCEO]

Theory-based Arts Courses [Taught by the Division of Humanities]

Arts and Creativity Contemporary Painting Experimental Drawing Chinese Painting Chinese Calligraphy Photography Cantonese Opera Contemporary Dance Chinese Dance Single-channel Video Art Multi-channel Video Art Installation Art …. ….

World Music Western Music Classical Music Jazz Western Opera and Literature Music Theory Music and Film Music and Dance Music, Drama and Theatre Film Art and Cinema Culture Western Art Chinese Art Western Architecture Contemporary Architecture Chinese Painting / Oil Painting / Ink Painting

17

Studio Arts Courses

• 1-credit courses

• Taught by part-time instructors

• 2 hours per week, supplemented by co-curricular workshop

• A heavy focus on hands-on practice of the art form

• Planned annual course offering from 2012-13:

• About 10 class sections per year covering a wide spectrum of arts

• To cater for ~5% of the undergraduate population (around 300-400 course places)

• Course pilots started from Spring 2010

• A rigorous course approval process

18

CRP

• Review Proposal

• Feedback/Suggestions to Instructor to Improve the Proposal

Instr-uctor

• Feedback/Modified Proposal from Instructor

CRP • Endorsement of Modified Proposal by CRP

CUS & CUCE

• Clearance of Other Issues by CUS Secretariat (e.g. course code, concurrence etc.)

• Endorsement of Course Proposal by CUS and CUCE

Instructor prepares the Course Proposal

Submit to Senate for information

19

A Rigorous Course Approval Process

Arts Panel

• Review Proposal

• Feedback/Suggestions to Instructor to Improve the Proposal

Instr-uctor

• Feedback/Modified Proposal from Instructor

Arts Panel

• Endorsement of Modified Proposal by the Arts Curriculum Panel

Divi-sion

• Endorsement of Course Proposal by the Curriculum Committee of the Division of Humanities

Difficulties and Solutions Difficulties Solutions

Course credits • HART courses only carry 1 credit

• Insufficient time for practice • Low incentive to enroll

• Offer co-curricular workshops to make room for more practice

• More course promotion efforts

Co-curricular Workshop

• Retain students in the workshop

• Incentive to participate

• Require deposit (refundable) at registration

• Award 12 HLTH1010 Hours

Course Venue & Facilities

• Short of properly fitted-out teaching venues (e.g. arts studio, auditorium, dance room)

• New teaching venues being planned and built

Part-time Instructors

• Recruitment • Retaining good instructors

• Mass advertisements or referral • Approach local part-time scholars

and arts practitioners

Broad Spectrum

• HART courses may not cover the full arts spectrum

• Offer co-curricular workshops and other activities (e.g. “Meeting With Artist Series”) to supplement these courses

20

It is only the end of the beginning!

21

Quality assurance scheme is getting ready

Teaching award to recognize excellence common core courses (it is in the first round)

Sub-categorization of courses for planning

Coordinate course offering from all schools for each semester

Coordinate arts curriculum, arts co-curriculum and activities in collaboration with other units for a sustained and balanced offer in different areas

Past, present, and future

As can be seen, much has been done in the past 4 years.

Currently, people are busy working out the details to prepare for the fall of 2012.

Many people realize :

Fall of 2012 is not the end of this GE project; it is just the beginning of a

new chapter.

How to sustain and continuously improve the program are big future challenges.

Some Personal View/Experience to GE

Unite the efforts of experts and practitioners.

There are different ways to successful GE training.

- always discuss big/important issues;

- literature and music in Cantonese operas.

Important points for students:

- making connections, have an open mind.

Important points for educators:

- have the heart, and have an open mind.

Our Hope

The government and society (general public) will see the importance and the value of GE.

Very importantly, the institution will:

- Recognize that GE training will produce more competitive, well rounded graduates.

- Encourage and reward their faculty members who put their effort in GE.

(William and Mary is a good example.)

Final Remarks

Fulbright Program on GE

- I had a wonderful Fulbright experience.

- Very educational, much to bring home.

- Will definitely maintain the connection.

GE development in Hong Kong.

- Rome was not built overnight.

- With the support of devoted and generous people, we have much hope on its future!

26

Thank you!