QM 2011 conference presentation:  Gaining faculty buy-in
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

QM 2011 conference presentation: Gaining faculty buy-in

on

  • 590 views

Gaining faculty buy-in into the Quality Matters process

Gaining faculty buy-in into the Quality Matters process

Statistics

Views

Total Views
590
Views on SlideShare
589
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.slashdocs.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • s
  • s

QM 2011 conference presentation:  Gaining faculty buy-in QM 2011 conference presentation: Gaining faculty buy-in Presentation Transcript

  • Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation Lessons from the Field
    • Dr. Cathy House
    • Truckee Meadows Community College
    • Nancy Webb
    • College of Southern Nevada
    • Dr. Barbara W. Altman
    • Texas A & M University, Central Texas
    • Greg Kaminski
    • Portland Community College
    • Dr. Christopher K. Randall
    • Kennesaw State University
  • 2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation 2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Each presenter will describe:
    • Context for change at their institution
    • Timeline for the QM implementation process
    • Issues related to faculty resistance to change
    • Tips/lessons learned to ease implementation & gain faculty buy-in
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
  •  
    • Truckee Meadows Community College
    • Context
    • FastTrack program funded by U.S. Dept. of Education
      • Increase retention rate
      • Explore new ideas
      • Rethink the way we are currently teaching
      • Opportunity to introduce QM
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Truckee Meadows Community College
    • Timeline - implementation
    • Received FIPS grant 2010
      • Began QM training for 2 web college staff
      • Introduced to 26 faculty members
      • 2011 Informal QM reviews mandatory for FastTrack classes
      • More to come in 2012
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Truckee Meadows Community College
    • Faculty resistance to change
    • 26 faculty that were introduced liked it
    • 6 FastTrack faculty paid stipend to develop courses with QM
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Truckee Meadows Community College
    • Lessons Learned
    • Journey just beginning……
      • Need champions
      • Instructional designer with faculty experience helpful
      • Must be seen as organized and non-threatening
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
  • Nancy Webb, M.Ed. Senior Analyst, eLearning Adjunct Instructor, Department of Education College of Southern Nevada [email_address]
    • College of Southern Nevada
    • Context
    • Largest community college (44,000 students) in Southern Nevada
    • 20 online degrees (Associate of Arts, Associate of Science), six Certificates of Achievement
    • Approximately 4700 students are full-time online students
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • College of Southern Nevada
    • Timeline – QM implementation
    • Applying the QM Rubric course to be offered online in Spring 2012
    • Two online courses internally reviewed
    • Approximately 15 faculty trained as Peer Reviewers in 2007
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • College of Southern Nevada
    • Faculty resistance to change
      • Perception that QM infringes on academic freedom
      • Lack of understanding of the process (course design versus delivery, viewing the process as part of faculty evaluation)
      • Departments/faculty want to choose how to interpret the QM rubric
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • College of Southern Nevada
    • Tips/lessons learned
      • Training!
      • Proof is in the pudding – QM does work! Demonstrate QM value by gathering student feedback & report this feedback to administration and other faculty
      • Encourage faculty to participate in official QM reviews, if possible
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
  •  
    • Texas A&M University/Central TX
    • Context
    • Satellite campus became independent in Fall 2009
    • Upper division and graduate programs in Arts & Science, Business and Education
    • 10 Online degree programs to be rolled out 2011-2013
    • Approximately 2,500 students
    • Heavy Military population
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Texas A&M University/Central TX
    • Timeline – QM Implementation
    • Began Fall 2010 drafting Institutional Plan for Distance Education
    • QM Implementation Plan taken to Faculty Senate January 2011, Special Task Force formed
    • QM Implementation Plan revised April 2011 & Task Force disbanded
    • Distance Learning Advisory Committee formed with representation from all divisions
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Texas A&M University/Central TX
    • Timeline – QM Implementation (cont.)
    • 40 Faculty/staff QM trained 2010 – 2011
    • Online Syllabus Template with QM elements embedded in place Spring 2011
    • Faculty Incentive Program developed
    • Joint work with Institutional Effectiveness on learning outcomes /Accreditation process
    • Support from Provost and Presidential levels for online initiatives
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Texas A&M University/Central TX
    • Faculty resistance to change
    • Invasion of academic freedom re: classroom teaching
    • Pass/fail nature of QM rubric
    • Inequity in oversight of online courses versus F2F
    • Opposition to non-peer reviews (external reviewers)
    • Concern over administrative staff role in faculty domain
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Texas A&M University/Central TX
    • Tips/lessons learned
    • Demonstrate how Rubric reflects best practices in teaching
    • Be willing to scale back certified reviews to internal reviews
    • Make sure to use “meets” and “does not meet” language (NOT pass/fail)
    • Training, training and more training
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Texas A&M University/Central TX
    • Tips/lessons learned (cont.)
    • Master syllabi provided to faculty with QM elements embedded
    • Show positive ties to Accreditation process
    • Future: Document parallel process for oversight in F2F classes
    • Future: Document impact of incentive program
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
  •  
    • Portland Community College
    • Context
    • Multi-campus system
    • 93,000 students – about 22,000 FTE
    • Online FTE: 4,500
    • 450 online course sections/term
    • Numerous Associate degrees available online
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Portland Community College
    • Timeline – QM Implementation
    • 2005 – present: Modified version of QM rubric for informal reviews
    • 2005 - present: State consortium funding for training & now reviews
    • 2006 – 2007: 3 official QM led peer reviews
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Portland Community College
    • Timeline – QM Implementation (cont.)
    • 2006 – present: Annual training Online & local (IYOC, APPQMR)
      • 110 PCC faculty received training
      • Currently 4 master reviewers & 44 certified peer reviewers, 1 trainer
    • 2011: Starting subscriber-managed QM reviews – completed one
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Portland Community College
    • Faculty resistance to change issues
    • Use of QM: DL Task Force issue (2010)
      • Treating online courses differently than F2F
      • Instructors being told what is and isn ’t quality education
      • Confusion over the intent/role of applying QM
      • Lack of clarity of the SAC role in providing course quality oversight
      • Institution ’s focus on outcomes supports a narrow interpretation of the educational process as one in which all outcomes are measurable
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Portland Community College
    • Tips/lessons learned
    • Keep a clear distinction between the use of QM as a course development guide vs. a peer review tool
    • Establish personal connections with faculty as a peer, reach out to clarify
    • Involve subject area “mentors” with the informal reviews as well
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Portland Community College
    • Tips/lessons learned (cont.)
    • Emphasize the professional development nature of the process, the faculty driven “peer” approach
    • Collaborate with the SAC when possible to encourage peer reviews of courses
    • Show how QM supports the college-wide effort to track assessment of outcomes
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
  •  
    • Kennesaw State University
    • Context
    • Comprehensive Public University
    • 24,100+ Students
    • Non-Residential, Non-Traditional
    • 6 Fully Online Degree Programs
    • … Several ‘Under Construction’
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Kennesaw State University
    • Timeline
    • Administration ’s Charge: Spring 07
      • Faculty Development Workshops
      • Process for Ensuring Course Quality
    • Faculty Advisory Committee / Consultant… & CETL Position
    • Initial Workshops & Reviews: Fall 0 7
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Kennesaw State University
    • Timeline (cont.)
    • Mandatory QM Reviews: Fall 08
    • Graduate Course Reviews: Spr 09
    • Distance Learning Center: Fall 10
    • Staff: 1 (Fall 07)  7 (Fall 11)
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Kennesaw State University
    • Participation
    • 434 Online Certified Faculty (+41)
    • 91 Faculty Peer Reviewers
    • 224 Approved Classes (+7)
    • 98 Classes “Under Development”
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Kennesaw State University
    • Faculty resistance to change
    • Shared Governance
    • Academic Freedom
    • Communication
    • Faculty Support
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Kennesaw State University
    • 2010 Faculty Survey Results
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation (Participants) Satisfied Dissatisfied N/A Process 75.6% 23.2% 1.2% Feedback 67.0% 23.2% 9.8% (Non-Participants) Satisfied Dissatisfied N/A Process 4.8% 19.0% 76.2% Feedback 9.5% 19.1% 71.4%
    • Kennesaw State University
    • 2010 Faculty Survey Results
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation (Participants) Improved Not Improved N/A Online 76.8% 6.1% 17.1% Blended 43.4% 7.9% 48.7% Face-to-Face 64.6% 13.2% 22.4%
    • Kennesaw State University
    • Tips/lessons learned
    • Mandate
    • Compensation
    • Communication
    • Faculty Support
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Discussion
    • Common Themes
    • Across Institutions
    • Faculty resistance to change
    • issues
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
    • Discussion
    • Common Themes
    • Across Institutions
    • Tips/Lessons Learned
    2011 QM Conference “Gaining Faculty Buy-In for QM Implementation” Panel Presentation
  • Questions Thank you for coming! Feel free to contact any of us for additional information.