5) What do you think are the barriers to making those changes? (set 1)

We have inadequate resources. 

The current description of the natural science requirement is somewhat inflexible. 

While we would like to hire a new faculty member (largely to help with [our needs in delivering our Gen Ed course), we have limited space physically and in terms of our own schedules/loads.  Hiring adjuncts poses additional problems, as we are trying to limit reliance on adjuncts.   

There was an overriding consensus in this department’s discussion that gen-ed outcomes might be a foregone conclusion --- that the gen-ed designers have already decided on priorities, e.g., to put humanities first. Regarding humanities, the perception is that the gen-ed planners will maintain the existing humanities structure regardless of whether it works, etc.

Has the Humanities sequence ever been visibly revised in past Gen Ed reviews? As psychologists and scientists, we know the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. If past Gen Ed reviews have consistently retained the seemingly immovable Hum sequence and its all-or-nothing requirement status, how confident can we be that it is truly up for grabs this time? This is a serious concern.

If the general education hours are lowered, the extra hours available might be taken up by the majors.

The Articulation Agreement with community colleges allows students to avoid courses that are essential to the General Education and liberal arts experience we want for our graduates.

Money, money, money.

Faculty workload.  We need time, resources, and incentives to create interdisciplinary courses and linkages between our courses.

It is not so much of a cultural barrier at UNCA as at other institutions.