Criteria for Selection of Religion 2 Exploration Courses

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Thoughtful and informed students who influence the affairs of the world seek to understand the wonders of the human condition and the universal phenomenon of religion in the context of a complex world.  Religion 2 builds upon the foundational and informative work of Religion 1 by aiding students in becoming thoughtful about the central role of religion in human history.  In particular students will engage in depth exploration one of the four areas of religious studies that is directly related to interest or overlaps with their major course of study.  The historical area helps students look at religion in particular times, places, and cultural settings.  The interpretive aspect of religious study focuses upon sacred texts (such as the Christian Bible, the Torah, Koran, and the like) and the interpretation thereof.  The comparative area of study looks at World Christianity, World Religions, and interdisciplinary methodologies of looking at religious experience within particular cultural contexts.  Finally, the constructive method of study analyzes theological and ethical modes of viewing how humans order their lives and understand the mysteries of God and existence. 

 

LIBERAL LEARNING GOALS AND CRITERIA

 

In order to be classified as a Religion 2 exploration course, a class will: 

 

  1. Explore a particular topic in the field of religion using one of the four approaches for understanding religion, namely, historical, interpretive, comparative, and constructive) [Liberal Learning Goals 1 & 3].

 

  1. Offer students an understanding of the importance of multiple perspectives and contexts within religious studies, which will enable them as responsible world citizens to reflect on the social implications of religious ideas and beliefs [Liberal Learning Goals 3 & 5]

 

  1. Enable students to think in thoughtful, integrative, and critical ways about religion by exploring a particular topic in depth.  This can happen in a number of potentially overlapping ways.  For example, students will explore various interpretations of primary and secondary texts, historically changing ideas, religious diversity, and/or multiple ethical/theological perspectives [Liberal Learning Goals 2, 3 & 4].

 

LEARNING OUTCOMES

 

Note: It is expected that Religion 2 courses may fit the classification of “Writing Intensive” for the “Writing Across the Core” requirement, depending upon course matter and instructor’s structuring of a course.

 

Religion 2 Outcomes

 

  1. Students will demonstrate a critical awareness of the role and value of religious expression and a competence in at least one of the four areas of religious study, i.e. historical, interpretive, comparative, and constructive courses. In so doing students will be become more aware global citizens [Learning Goals 3, 4, & 5].
  2. Students will demonstrate a in-depth understanding of one of the modes of religious studies and inquiry (namely, historical, interpretive, comparative, or constructive) through clear expression of ideas in oral and written manners [Learning Goal 2].
  3. Students will demonstrate a clear reasoned ability to use critical interpretation through independent and group learning as a method of understanding texts, practices, and artifacts within a particular religious context which involves also social, political, and historical factors [Learning Goal 1]. 

 

ASSESSMENT

 

  1. We recommend that each Religion 2 exploration course be assessed with an instrument, which at the time of this writing needs to be developed. Instructors should link outcomes to assessment and include this form when submitting the course for core approval.

 

  1. We recommend that core course assessment be separate from departmental assessment and coordinated by the Core Committee chair, the Director of Assessment, and the division chair for Core and Integrative Studies.

 

TIMELINE

 

The submission deadline for proposed Religion 2 exploration courses to be taught in the 2007-08 academic year was October 13, 2006, but the Core Committee has granted the department leeway on this issue, for which we are deeply grateful.  We plan on bringing course proposals forward on a regular basis each semester, probably 4 in the Spring 2007, and at least, but probably more each semester following until the 20 or so courses are all brought forth.  We plan to have all these courses to Core by Spring 2008.  Proposals should include the attached assessment model with assessment artifacts listed. The committee expects that departments will review course proposals before they are submitted to the Core committee for approval.  With regard to Religion, the Curriculum Committee (Michelle Lelwica, Roy Hammerling, Elna Solvang, and Jim Aageson) act as a screening committee for such courses.

 

 

Religion 2 Working Group

Roy Hammerling (chair)            Jim Aageson                             Somaya Abdullah

Per Anderson                           Shawn Carruth                         Roy Hammerling

Stewart Herman                       Hilda Koster                             Tammy Lanaghan        

Michelle Lelwica                       Jan Pranger                              Ernie Simmons