Background
In the Fall of 1999, the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate directed the Bac Core Committee to
review the status of the fitness requirement. In particular, the Executive Committee wanted the Bac Core
Committee to consider a variety of concerns about the requirement and HHP 231 that had been expressed by
students and faculty over the years. The specific concerns will be detailed and addressed below.
Since initiation of the university Baccalaureate Core Requirements for graduation a fitness requirement has
been included (Appendix 1). Prior to the initiation of the Bac Core, students had fulfilled a general education
health requirement by taking PAC courses. In the Bac Core there has only been a single course offering that
students can take to meet the requirement. This is HHP 231: Lifetime Fitness for Health.
By their nature, concerns raised about this course were anecdotal. The committee was unable to determine the
extent to which negative sentiments were widespread. We do know that there is significant dissatisfaction among
some faculty members. The level and extent of student dissatisfaction is less clear. For example, when the
committee contacted the ASOSU Undergraduate Senate, the Senate was content to wait for our report and did not
give the impression that concerns about HHP 231 were a pressing issue. The ideal way to address our charge
would have been with a properly conducted survey of student and faculty opinion. The committee did not have the
time or resources to conduct such a survey, given the time-line assigned for submission of this report. (A poorly
conducted "quickie" survey the committee judged to be not worth the effort involved.) The committee is acutely
aware that its judgments about the fitness requirement made under these circumstances involve a great deal of
uncertainty. We have made efforts to carefully scrutinize the various anecdotal reports we have received, but
recognize that these may overemphasize the nature or extent of various concerns about the fitness requirement.
We have discovered that a significant number of common concerns about HHP 231 seem to be based on
misinformation or lack of information.
The committee did try to educate itself about the current nature of HHP 231 and sought comment from a range
of campus sources. The committee has:
· reviewed the HHP 231 course material
· received a presentation by Dr. Anthony Wilcox, the current course director, on the nature and rationale
for the current course structure. (Appendix 3) The material in Appendix 2 also addresses a number of
the concerns that have been expressed about the course, e.g. administration of the course waiver exam,
the appropriateness of the course content, and the importance of fitness education for student health,
now and in the future.
· reviewed information provided by the Registrar, Barbara Balz, about the petitioning/waiver process
for students who seek to test out of the course. (Appendix 5)
· sought and received comments from head advisors.
This report will be provided to the Undergraduate Student Senate in order to allow them to formulate a student
response to areas of concern about the fitness requirement.
Current structure of HHP 231
The current course used by students to fulfill the Bac Core fitness requirement is HHP 231. Students
attend one-hour lectures in Milam auditorium twice a week. They also enroll in two-hour lab sections that meet
once a week. The lectures cover such topics as exercise benefits, appropriate exercise routines, exercise
injury problems, beneficial diet, psychological health, stress management, weight management, alcohol and
drug use, AIDS and STDs. The laboratory sessions provide an experiential and practice aspect to complement
the lectures. These include such things as individual assessments of students' aerobic fitness , muscular
strength, current diet, stress factors, etc. Students also give oral presentations of group (or individual) research
projects in the labs. A student's grade in HHP 231 is determined by a combination of scores on assignments
connected with the labs, a midterm and a final exam. The course points are divided approximately evenly between
exams and lab assignments.
The original course proposal for HHP 231 from 1989 described its purpose as follows,
The purpose of the Lifetime Fitness for Health course is to impart an understanding of the role of
physical activity and other behaviors in maintaining the health and well-being of the human body.
The course is designed to achieve two major goals: to develop an intellectual awareness of the
fundamental concepts and contemporary research in health and physical fitness and to provide
personal experiences in the formulation and implementation of appropriate exercise regimens and
health behaviors.
Prof. Anthony Wilcox has more recently described the goals of the course to the Baccalaureate Core Committee
as follows,
… the focus of the HHP 231 course offered the potential for the greatest personal and public benefit. Since
the health benefits resulting from physical activity are manifold and far-reaching …, and since there is a high
prevalence of inactivity in the population (60%), the information and skills acquired in this class can have a
great, life-long impact on our students and the society they enter. Such is not the case if the focus in a
course is other than fitness. The HHP 231 course fulfills the criteria for the Fitness course in the
Baccalaureate Core - criteria that was based upon the profoundly positive health benefits achieved through
these fitness and health behaviors.
These two descriptions indicate that the nature of the current HHP 231 course is appropriately located in the Skills
category of the Bac Core.
Issues Related to the Fitness Requirement
1. Appropriateness of the Fitness requirement in general
Since the time of the original discussions about the Baccalaureate Core in 1989 some faculty have
questioned the appropriateness of having a health or fitness general education requirement at OSU at all. They
felt that it was not comparable in educational centrality to such requirements as math, writing, science, literature
and the arts, etc. This view seemed to hold that while studies in health, conditioning, etc. might be admirable
areas for research and teaching, health and fitness classes are not an appropriate required component of a
general education curriculum.
The rationale for having general education requirements in college curricula is often expressed in the
idea that a college education should have as its goal more than providing the training and the background
necessary for a specific field of endeavor. The general education component provides students with a background
that will better enable them to lead productive and satisfying lives within Oregon, the United States and the world.
In this broader context, it seems appropriate to give students the tools to manage their own physical well-being
and health as well as intellectual and aesthetic tools that will enable them to be responsible, productive citizens.
Thus, it is the judgment of the Bac Core Committee that a fitness/health requirement is entirely consistent with
the goals of the Bac Core. The proper balance between the health and fitness components of the requirement is
a topic that needs further examination. See our recommendations (at the end).
This discussion, of course, raises difficult questions about the nature of a general education curriculum,
such as that in the Bac Core. The appropriateness or inappropriateness of some area of study for the Bac Core is
ultimately a judgment of the entire faculty. The Baccalaureate Core Committee, however, in looking at the overall
goals that are both explicit and implicit in the Core requirements feel that a fitness/health requirement is appropriate
for the Core.
2. Content/Appropriateness of HHP 231
One concern about HHP 231 that has been persistently expressed by students to advisors and others is that
its content is material that they've "already had in high school" and that this isn't really college level material. The
committee has reviewed the course material for HHP 231, which is available on the web at
http://osu.orst.edu/instruction/hhp231/ . Our assessment is that the level is appropriate for a lower-division college
course. Most importantly, we find that there is a contradiction between the complaint that students already know the
material and the relatively low percentage of students who opt to "test out" of the course early or seek to challenge or
waive the course via the Registrar, as explained below. It seems logical that if students already know the material
and dislike being in the course that they would avail themselves of the opportunities that exist to finish the course
early. They don't. We also note (see Appendix 4) that the responses to Question 11 ("As a result of having this
instructor, I have learned a significant number of new ideas and/or skills) does not indicate a widespread perception
that the course covers "familiar" material.
3. Course Waiver/Petitioning Process
AR 23 and AR 24 provide on a university wide basis for a student to "challenge" an OSU course, take an
exam, and (if they pass) receive course credit (AR 23) or to take an exam which allows an otherwise required
course to be waived as a requirement, with no course credit granted (AR 24). In each case a student must
petition the Academic Requirements Committee and pay a $60 fee to the Registrar's office.
Separately, in response to student
perceptions that material in HHP 231 had been covered in high school, the College of Health and Human
Performance (HHP) has developed a "Waiver Exam" procedure for HHP 231. (The term "Waiver Exam" is
misleading as discussed below.) This was to accommodate, in an administratively feasible way, those students
who felt they already understood the material in HHP 231 from high school courses or other sources,. Under this
procedure a student registered for HHP 231 is given a single exam that determines their course grade. The "waiver"
exam is administered in the third week of the course and students receive exam results within three weeks after that.
Students who pass the "waiver" exam essentially complete the course on a self-study basis without attending labs
or lectures.
This means that there are three separate pathways by which students can fulfill or challenge the fitness
requirement. Distinguishing among these pathways is confusing for both students and advisors. One source of
this confusion is that the HHP instituted "Waiver Exam" is inappropriately termed a course "waiver." In reality it
is a mechanism to complete the course via self-study. The provision of a period for self-study of the course material
is the principal reason for administering the exam in the third week of the term. The committee finds it entirely
appropriate for a unit to have a system that allows students to "test-out" of a course as a result of intensive
self-study. We do believe that there is some administrative confusion inherent in the current structure.
The number of students who have opted for one of the pathways available to complete HHP 231 early is
relatively small. In the 97-98 school year, enrollments each term were in the high 700's, in the 98-99 school year
they were in the mid 800's a term. In Fall 1999 approximately 900 students enrolled in HHP 231. During this period,
approximately 6.5% of course enrollment attempted to "test-out" of the course by one of the three paths indicated
above. Most of these were students enrolled in the course and using the HHP waiver pathway. HHP statistics show
that students taking the waiver exam received C or better on the exam in 79% of cases, during the period from Fall
1997 through Fall 1999. (Appendix 6)
4. Class Size
One (anecdotal) source of student dissatisfaction with HHP 231 stems from the large lecture format for the
class, which meets in Milam Auditorium. Evaluations of the course in Summer Terms, when it is taught in small
sections with lecture and lab combined with one instructor are uniformly more positive than in the other terms. We
understand that HHP is attempting to move all of the lecture material onto the web. This will allow either an
elimination of the large lecture format or, at least, allow those students to do so who wish to follow a self-study
format for the lecture portion of the course.
5. Student Choice The committee believes that the concerns mentioned in sections 1- 4 above have
proved on examination to be either not substantial or of a nature that can be addressed by modifications of the
current structures or procedures for HHP 231. The concern that we are addressing under the heading of "student
choice" poses a more substantial problem for the current structure of the Baccalaureate Core fitness requirement
and HHP 231. Although the reports are anecdotal, the Fitness requirement of the Core is noteworthy for the amount
of comment that it has received over the years. To the committee's knowledge no other requirement of the Core
has attracted as much concern as this one, albeit sometimes misguided or misinformed. The committee attributes
this to the somewhat anomalous position of the Fitness requirement. HHP 231 has sometimes been described as
"the only course that every OSU student must take." This one-size-fits-all aspect of HHP 231 is addressed in our
recommendations below. We mention here that the unique position of HHP 231 is somewhat over stated. WR 121
is also a unique requirement, although this general education requirement is well nigh universal in university
curricula. (MTH 105 is a minimal requirement for fulfilling the Mathematics skills requirement, but other Math
courses can be used.)
The general student perception is that in all other areas of the Core, as is typical of general education
requirements in most universities, the student is presented with a menu of choices for fulfilling a particular
requirement. Students expect that choice in the fitness skills area of the Baccalaureate Core. On the other hand,
the faculty of HHP have a well thought out instructional rationale for presenting a unitary package of information
and experience that is significant for the lives of the majority of students (Appendix 3). Although we recognize
that there are reasonable educational rationales for a unitary course, the committee does not believe that they
preclude meeting student needs for fitness education in a manner that allows for student choice.
The committee has identified three possible pathways for meeting student expectations for choice in fulfilling
the Fitness Requirement.
Option 1: Change HHP 231 so that it effectively provides choice.
This option would use the smaller lab sections of HHP 231 to provide specialized pathways through the
course for students with diverse fitness focuses, e.g. weight control, strength conditioning, etc. The committee has
been informed of plans by HHP to institute some such more specialized options within the HHP 231 course for the
2000-01 school year. Based on the information currently available to the committee, this will include lab sections
focused on weight management and stress management. There are also plans to integrate aspect of certain
current Physical Activity Courses (PAC) such as aerobic dance, resistance training, jogging, into some lab
sections. This will incorporate the information and experience of the lab sections into the specifics of an activity
of interest to the student. The committee applauds the HHP faculty for its willingness to innovate to accommodate
diverse student needs and interests.
Option 2: Change the Baccalaureate Core Fitness criteria to a allow a selection of fitness skills courses, as in
the Writing II requirement.
The current Bac Core criteria for a fitness course are rather tightly written for a course similar to HHP 231. One
way in which more student choice can be offered in the context of a fitness requirement is to rewrite the fitness
course criteria so that they have an emphasis which is appropriate for the Skills component of the Bac Core, but
allow for a more diverse type of course to satisfy those requirements. A model for this might be the Writing II
component of the Bac Core. Writing II is focused on developing writing skills, but the courses that meet the
requirements are focused on specific types or aspects of writing, e.g. poetry, technical writing, business writing.
Analogous courses in the fitness context might be something like Aerobic Fitness, Fitness for Strength, or Fitness
and Weight Management.
Option 3: Change the Baccalaureate Core Fitness Criteria to a Perspectives category which would allow courses
that emphasize either health or fitness topics.
The Bac Core fitness requirement could be rewritten along the lines of the Perspectives categories. The generality
of such requirements would provide for courses with less emphasis on fitness activities and more emphasis on
informational content on general health issues. Such changes would make it appropriate for departments outside
of HHP, e.g. Nutrition, to offer Fitness/Health Bac Core courses.
Analysis and Recommendations
In the committee's judgment the three options outlined above are the practical alternatives for addressing the
concern about student choice, which we have identified as the overriding issue connected with the Fitness
Requirement. To carefully judge between these options we would have had to have the time and resources to
conduct a more extensive investigation of student and faculty attitudes. The committee does believe that such
further investigation is desirable before definitive changes are made. However, lacking such resources, the
committee does believe that it is incumbent on them to make some recommendation to the Executive based on
our own judgment and the information we have been able to gather.
The compelling rationale for a Fitness requirement in the Baccalaureate Core is the potential for each
student to begin to develop or to continue to develop good health and fitness practices that are essential for
life-long productivity in all aspects of life. The committee has come to the conclusion that this rationale for a
Fitness requirement in the Bac Core means it must lead students to incorporate appropriate fitness activities
into their lives. Consequently, while health information is an important component of a course fitting the Fitness
requirement, an appropriate course cannot be solely informational but also should have a skills component. We
believe that Option 3 will not ensure this skills emphasis is in the Core. While the incorporation of specialized lab
tracks into HHP 231 is a meaningful response to student, faculty, and advisor concerns and needs, related to
choice, these changes alone will not provide adequate choice. Thus we believe that Option 1 will not adequately
address these concerns.
As a result, we make the following recommendations to the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate:
Recommendation 1
The Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate should ask the 2000-01 Baccalaureate Core Committee
to work with HHP and other interested parties to revise the current Baccalaureate Core Fitness Criteria in a manner
which will allow a number of courses focusing on both health and fitness skills to fulfill the revised criteria. The
committee should consider as a model the criteria for the Writing II component of the Bac Core.
Recommendation 2
If the Faculty Senate decides to retain a Baccalaureate Core structure in which HHP 231 is the sole course by
which students can fulfill the fitness requirement, then the Registrar's Office, the College of Health and Human
Performance, the Academic Requirements Committee, and other interested parties should work to develop an
administrative pathway by which students can fulfill the Fitness requirement of the Core through self-study and a
test. The focus in these discussions should be on student convenience, and transparency to students and advisors.
Respectfully submitted by Faculty Senate 1999-2000 Baccalaureate Core Committee:
Michael Scanlan (Philosophy), Chair
Bonnie Avery (Library)
Robert Burton (Executive Comm.)
Vicki Tolar Burton (WIC Director)
Robert Jarvis (Fisheries and Wildlife)
John Lee (Mathematics)
Kurt Peters (Ethnic Studies)
Satish Reddy (Mathematics)
Christine Snow (Exercise and Sport Science)
|
