# data[].attributes.body
Who teaches the courses?
How will these changes affect departments that have a heavy Gen Ed load now and what would their future departments look like?
Will this redesign be more costly (will higher paid faculty need to teach smaller Gen Ed classes)?
Will the teaching burden of the redesign fall on those units that currently have the capacity to teach the courses?

# data[].attributes.body
Will this replace LBST and what kind of effects will that have on faculty resources?

# data[].attributes.body
For majors that have accrediting bodies with very prescriptive content it may be difficult to fit in more material in upper division courses. My (AZ) response was to think of it more like a mapping exercise - where are these competencies showing up in the major now.

# data[].attributes.body
There was a comment that the current LBST model is complicated and can cause confusion among students. Can a revised Gen Ed simplify that process?

# data[].attributes.body
Is this a checkbox that students will need to fulfill? Will they need to take X number of courses that satisfy a competency?
My (AZ) response to this question was that if competencies were built into the majors then students wouldn't have to check a box to fulfill a competency - they should be getting that information through the early year Gen Ed curriculum as well as the major.

# data[].attributes.body
Can students switch themes?
Will starting a theme and switching themes delay time to graduation?
Will they have less freedom to explore disciplines?
What does "theme" mean?
How often (if ever) will themes change?

# data[].attributes.body
Equity, Ethics

# data[].attributes.body
Visual Literacy

# data[].attributes.body
I like this as a grid, making sure that all "competencies" and "themes" are checked off.  I don't like the idea at all of students focusing on one theme.  Current W and O goals should be retained because they usually support the structure of majors.