Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: SACS question



Having been though a SACS visit (and successfully, I might add), we were
asked, by the VP of Academic Affairs, to justify the teaching of astronomy
by our physics faculty. We found after the fact that some had gone though
without being justified (didn't notice that they hadn't been done). The
SACS visiting team did not identify anyone as being a problem. Only our VP
had issues.



Mariam Dittmann

-----Original Message-----
From: Forum for Physics Educators [mailto:PHYS-L@list1.ucc.nau.edu] On
Behalf Of Bernard Cleyet
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 3:23 PM
To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
Subject: Re: SACS question

My nasty comment is, if one must justify to SACS this, they (SACS) are
unqualified to accredit.

bc

David Bowman wrote:

Regarding Aaron's question:


We are undergoing accreditation review by SACS. We have to document
the qualifications of various faculty for teaching certain courses.
I personally teach astronomy and I often hire physicists to teach
astronomy.

How have others argued that physicists are qualified to teach
introductory astronomy?

Aaron


We have always had our Intro Astronomy course have a physics- prefixed
course number & it's been taught by physicists all along.
There has never been any question about that from SACS.

David Bowman

_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l