Course Types and Delivery Methods Policy

I concur with Dr. McGee re: the use of experimental courses. Being able to offer a course experimentally enables a program to respond to emerging issues/needs within a program's curriculum in a timely manner. Getting a course through the curriculum process is time-consuming and could prevent a program from being able to offer students instruction on those emerging issues/topics.

However, the policy wording is “may not” rather than “shall not,” so it could be interpreted that an experimental course might not be used in the program of study, but could be.

The policy states that an Experimental Course “may not be used as a substitution for a required course in a program of study.” This statement may restrict programs, particularly at the graduate level, from creating courses that address emerging technologies or techniques that are essential for students' workforce and scholarly needs that meet the pace of change in today's world. Getting a course approved through the curriculum process takes several months, whereas, an experimental course has a shorter approval process. Therefore, it might be used to meet needs described above. If we prohibit these courses from being used to substitute for a required course, we are limiting programs' ability to be flexible. I suggest the policy developers consider using wording such as “typically may not be used as a substitution…” Or “may not be used as substitution for a required course unless approved by the academic dean (undergraduate) or Dean of the Graduate School (graduate).”