REGULATION 300: AMERICAN CULTURES BREADTH REQUIREMENT

•  Minutes of the Special Meeting
•  Regulation 300
•  Vote count
•  Report of the Special Committee on Education and Ethnicity

Minutes of the Special Meeting

Berkeley Division
Academic Senate
25 April 1989
Zellerbach Auditorium

After determining that a quorum was present, approximately 400 members, Professor J.L. Heilbron, Chair, who presided, called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.

.
.
.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATIONAL POLICY
H. H. Bingham

Prior to asking for the Report from the Committee on Educational Policy (CEP), Professor Heilbron announced that if the American Cultures Breadth Requirement (new Regulation 300) were approved, it would be necessary to act on the Resolution which provides the framework for effecting the Requirement, both of which appear in the Notice, page 3. He requested that members remain until the entire business at hand was completed, and cautioned guests that any disruption of the proceedings would be cause to expel them from the Auditorium.

Professor Heilbron recognized Professor Bingham, CEP Chair. In his introductory remarks Professor Bingham expressed appreciation to the members of the Special Committee on Education and Ethnicity for their superb job of reconciling the many diverse views gleaned from the various workshops, forums, and opinions expressed by all segments of the academic community.

Professor Bingham then moved approval of the American Cultures Breadth Requirement (new Regulation 300).

Prior to discussion from the floor, Professor Heilbron reminded members of the 10-minute limit on statements, in accord with parliamentary procedure. The Chairs of two Standing Committees had requested to be heard prior to general discussion and were recognized following remarks by Professor W.S. Simmons, Chair of the Special Committee on Education and Ethnicity.

Professor Heilbron recognized Professor Simmons who in his opening remarks expressed appreciation to the members of the Berkeley Division for entrusting the Special Committee with this important charge. He addressed the major directive of the charge, "to encourage academic innovation relevant to ethnic and cultural diversity", which the proposal met in the following ways:

1. It can be satisfied by courses from many disciplines which cross many sections of the Campus.

2. it will require little or no increase in the student course load because many of the cultural requirement courses can count toward the major can be added to the list of breadth requirements that various disciplines now require outside of the major program.

3. It directly addresses the educational challenge posed by a changing student body and focuses on how the interactions of diverse peoples have shaped and continue to shape our American society. It is an integrative approach, realistic and scholarly.

In conclusion, Professor Simmons said that he and the members of the Special Committee support the language of the Regulation and of the Resolution as written.

Professor C. Maslach, Chair, Committee on the Status of Women and Ethnic Minorities (SWEM), reported that this Committee firmly supports the proposal for several reasons:

1. Berkeley students must be aware of the cultural diversity which surrounds them and in which they will have to live.

2. Its integrative approach incorporates current scholarly work into the heart of the core curriculum on American cultures.

3. By adopting it, Berkeley can demonstrate again its leadership in academic scholarship.

4. It will facilitate comparison among various and their contributions to American society.

Professor G.W. Chang, Chair, Committee on Student Affairs, reported that in general students support the proposal, but also expressed some concerns. The most widespread was the worry that students might experience the same sort of difficulties in providing in or in finding courses in American Cultures that they now encounter in fulfilling the reading and composition requirement.

Professor A. M. Portis opened the general discussion by speaking in support of the proposal. He commended the Special Committee for its effective use of the time extended from last year to review its initial proposal. The requirement, if approved, would be administered by a committee of the Berkeley Division so that members would continue to have a say in development of the program. Problems might arise but trying to anticipate them now is not productive. Professor Portis urged members to approve the proposed requirement.

Professor W. K. Muir, Jr., Chair, Committee on Courses of Instruction, reported that the Committee had not had time to study the proposal, and that his remarks were addressed to practical issues, not educational ones. Copies of Professor Muir’s statement were available at the meeting, copy of which is appended to the minutes. He questioned availability of adequate resources to accommodate the needs of the students, both instructional and physical, if the requirement were approved and urged members to vote against the proposal.

R. B. Park, the Vice Chancellor, responded in part to Professor Muir’s concerns regarding resources. The anticipated faculty needed for the cultures requirement represents about one percent of the faculty complement, which can be met with relative ease. By 1994 some 15 additional class rooms the size of 145 Dwinelle should be available. In his opinion, the cultures requirement is an educational issue rather than a question of resource availability.

Professor G. Shapiro moved the following amendment (language underscored and in parentheses) to proposed Regulation 300, which was seconded:

§300.B The American Cultures Breadth Requirement is (may be) satisfied by passing, with a grade not lower than C- or P, a course expressly approved for that purpose by the appropriate committee of the Berkeley Division, (which will also specify other means, such as term papers or special examinations, by which the requirement may be satisfied).

Professor Shapiro observed that learning is an individual process and that the class room is not the only instructional vehicle. This amendment could alleviate some pressures on campus resources.

Professor L. W. Levine and R. Herr spoke against the amendment. Both emphasized the need for the breadth requirement. Professor Levine especially noted that modern scholarly work on diverse cultures is not yet incorporated into the formal structure of higher education; its principal forum is the class room. This is an opportunity for the University to begin a process that will conclude the cycle of prejudice and stereotypes that has prevented understanding of our own culture and our own identity. Professor Herr noted that historically "breadth requirements" have been a major part of the curriculum and that their main purpose is to help educate students to meet the needs of a changing society.

There being no further discussion, the vote was taken on the amendment proposed by Professor Shapiro. The motion lost by a count of 79 in favor, 289 against.

Professor W. L. Jolly, noting that no amendments were pending and asserting that there had been adequate opportunity to ponder the proposal, moved the previous question. Professor Heilbron stated that the motion is not open to debate or amendment and requires a two-thirds vote to pass.

When put to a standing vote, the motion to call the previous question passed.

The main motion was then put to the vote. It required a simple majority to pass. As a matter of clarification, Professor Heilbron reminded members that the Resolution was a separate item of business and would be moved by Professor Bingham if Regulation 300 were approved.

The motion to approve Regulation 300. American Cultures Breadth Requirement passed by a count of 227 in favor, 194 against.

Professor Bingham moved the Resolution to establish a panel to determine which courses would satisfy the American Cultures Requirement. The panel would function as a standing sub-committee of the Committee on Educational Policy. Professor Simmons stated that although the panel does not meet specifics in the Special Committee’s proposal, the structure does reflect the Committee’s intent. Courses are to be systematically comparative and present a pluralistic perspective. At a minimum, courses are to give significant attention to three of the five ethnic groups stated in the legislation.

Professor R. W. Rader moved, and it was seconded, to delete the second paragraph of the Resolution. His concern was the latitude the language would accord to the accrediting panel. In clarification Professor Simmons agreed that the legislation as written does override the Special Committee’s recommendation, but that the Committee accepts the proposed language.

When a voice vote was taken on the proposal to delete the second paragraph of the Resolution, the amendment failed.

Professor K.S. Pister asked whether the panel would also review transfer courses from other institutions; the answer was that it would.

The motion to approve the Resolution was passed by voice vote.

The Regulation and the Resolution were approved as proposed and read:

Part II. Regulations Applicable to Candidates for the Bachelor’s Degree or for the Professional Degrees or Certificates in Degree Awarding Agencies

Title I. REQUIREMENTS [formerly "Residence Requirements"]
A290. Residence and A291. Senior Residence [no change]

300. American Cultures Breadth Requirement [new]

A. Satisfaction of the American Cultures Breadth Requirement is a prerequisite for every Bachelor’s Degree awarded to students who begin their studies at Berkeley in lower-division standing in Fall 1991 or thereafter, or in upper-division standing in Fall 1993 or thereafter.

B. The American Cultures Breadth Requirement is satisfied by passing, with a grade not lower than C- or P, a course expressly approved for that purpose by the appropriate committee of the Berkeley Division.

C. The courses that satisfy this requirement must be integrative and comparative and address theoretical and analytical issues relevant to understanding race, culture, and ethnicity in American history and society. Each course will take substantial account of groups drawn from at least three of the following: African Americans, American Indians, Asian Americans, Chicano/Latinos, and European Americans.

D. The course satisfying this requirement are not precluded from satisfying other requirements.

RESOLUTION:
To implement the Breadth Requirement in the study of American Cultures, the Division orders its Committee to provide members for a panel of nine, which will decide what courses satisfy Regulation 300. This panel is to function as a Subcommittee of the Division’s Committee on Educational Policy, one member of which will act as its Chair. Six of the remaining eight members will be appointed by the Committee on Committees; the remaining two will be students chosen by the Associated Students of the University of California, Berkeley, in accordance with By-Law 13.C.

The terms of reference of the Subcommittee on the Breadth Requirement in American Cultures is Regulation 300, interpreted according to guidelines implicit in the Report of the Special Committee on Education and Ethnicity.

Secretary’s Note: Conforming Changes will be made to Divisional Regulations governing Schools and Colleges.

ADJOURNMENT: 4:30 p.m.
Attest: R. L. Wiegal, Secretary