Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Dla presentation june_2010_final
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Dla presentation june_2010_final

447
views

Published on

Published in: Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
447
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Very little discussion of distance education in contracts in the literature
  • Distance education appeals to a wide variety of students. The flexibility, convenience and accessibility of distance education is good for those busy with jobs and family who cannot attend class on campus. Those in rural areas may be too far away or may be seeking more course variety than what is available locally (Dalziel, 2003). Still others travel frequently for work or military. Many high school students taking community college classes find it tough to get to campus if they don’t have a car. Distance education is also helpful for students who are shy or disabled, who feel more comfortable with text based communication then they do with speaking up in class. This variety of reasons supports the general finding that most students who take distance education courses are taking courses on campus as well (Dalziel, 2003). Students who tend to do best at distance education are motivated and self disciplined, who do their work in a timely manner. This often describes the older, working adults whom one frequently finds in community college classes (Dalziel, 2003).
  • While distance education has great advantages, some are quick to point out its disadvantages as well. Students and faculty report that they spend more time on distance education courses than on traditional courses and that distance education courses are more rigorous, since one cannot just sit back and passively learn as one can in the classroom (Hiltz & Goldman, 2005). It is not appropriate for students who struggle with basic reading and computational skills nor does it work for students who lack convenient access to the necessary computer equipment (Hiltz and Goldman, 2005). Another disadvantage of distance education is that it frequently meets with faculty resistance. A major concern is the perceived increase in work. Dirr (2003) found that faculty who have taught distance education courses agree that there is more work than with traditional courses, but that they believe the benefits outweighed the extra work involved. Another concern, by both faculty and administrators, is that the quality of distance education courses is less than the quality in traditional courses. Some look at diploma mills, fraudulent institutions which offer worthless degrees, and express concern that reputable institutions will lose value if distance education courses are offered (Loane, 2001). Others, like the National Council of State Supervisors for Languages (NCSSFL) look to the discipline specific need for interactivity in foreign language instruction and wonder if that can successfully happen in distance education courses (NCSSFL, undated). The NCSSFL addresses its concern by providing specific guidelines for distance instruction. For example, it recommends a high level of teacher/student interaction through email, phone calls, chat rooms or web classrooms.
  • . For community college faculty, workload is today is defined in a way not dissimilar to how it was defined at Harvard College in 1636, when faculty were foremost concerned with classroom teaching (Diamond & Adams, 2002, Cohen & Brower, 1996). While there is some nod to committee service, there is no expectation of research (Cohen & Brower, 1996). However, the work of teaching has always extended beyond the classroom. Workload includes not only instructional hours, but class preparation, office hours, curriculum development, student assessment, program administration, student advising, student tutoring and other one on one work with students (Benjamin 2006, Diamond & Adams, 2002). Rhoades (2000) explains that the actual functions of faculty have not changed dramatically with the addition of technology. What has changed is how the forms of instructional work are impacted by technology. Rhoades emphasizes that, from the perspective of workload, the technology is not replacing faculty work, it is being layered on top of it, making for more work. For instance, one does not just write a syllabus and make photocopies of it anymore. Now it is posted on faculty websites and emailed to students. Faculty must be concerned that the digital format is accessible to all students, etc. (Rhodes, 2000). Rhoades notes a study he conducted with Larry Leslie where he found that traditional faculty spent 1 hour or more each day on email with students – setting up appointments, responding to questions and advising. Of course, faculty members who do engage in distance education have much greater impacts on workload. Even more students make use of email and course enrollments may be higher, as they are not limited by the seats in a classroom (Benjamin 2006). On the other hand, institutions may be compelled to keep class sizes similar to that of traditional classrooms precisely because of the increased workload associated with distance education classes. Failure to do so could lead to faculty burnout (Dalziel, 2003). This is because few faculty get release time to develop or manage distance education or other technology enhanced courses (Levin, 1993), despite the perception that distance education courses take much more time to teach (Hiltz & Goldman, 2005, AAUP, undated). Hiltz and Goldman note that the first time offering any class takes more time and that, when commuting and other time savings are considered, distance education courses may actually take less time. The issue of commuting time may be part of the workload problem. Faculty tend to work at home more on distance education courses, thus blurring the line between work time and free time (Levin, 1993). The sense that one is working all the time contributes to the perception that distance education courses take more time to teach than traditional courses (Hiltz & Goldman, 2005).
  • The concern about workload is only one of the disincentives reported by faculty who consider distance instruction. Others look at inadequate financial compensation, lack of rewards, and concerns that they might be replaced by the very distance education courses that they help to develop (Wolcott, 2003, Dirr, 2003). Faculty members often seek to negate these disincentives with contract terms, as will be discussed later. For others, distance teaching reward in itself. This is good, since Wolcott (1997) found few examples of formal faculty rewards or recognition through traditional means like rank, tenure or merit pay. Wolcott found evidence of some informal rewards, like pats on the back, small tokens of appreciation and public acknowledgement by administrators. These kinds of motivators were especially important for community college faculty.
  • The institution is further responsible for the technical delivery of the courses, including having in place needed technology and equipment (AAUP, undated). This includes with it the responsibility to train faculty to use the technology provided. Faculty, in general, are unconvinced that institutions will meet their obligations to faculty with regards to technology and other institutional support. Wolcott (2003) found that a great deal of faculty resistance to distance education comes from a lack of an institutional support framework to train, compensate and reward distance education faculty commensurate with traditional faculty. Wolcott and Wright proposed a framework designed to increase participation, emphasizing a central leadership role for faculty and emphasizing the need for support and advocacy from administrators. The training that institutions provide must be ongoing and include and orientation and training for the students who use the technology as well. The AAUP (undated) also looks to see that the institution hires faculty who possess the capacity to teach successfully in the distance education setting. The institution must employ faculty who are academically and experientially credentialed to oversee the instruction, evaluation, and grading requirements of distance education programs and courses. The skills, qualifications and credentials of the distance education faculty must be equivalent to traditional faculty. And, as noted, the faculty must also possess the technical skills to teach in the distance education environment. The institution needs to provide adequate support personnel for faculty to access when needed (AAUP, undated). In the case of interactive television courses, where physical instructional sites are involved, the institution needs to provide adequate support at both the sending and receiving sites. Support at remote sites must include clerical, technical and library support and adequate security for faculty and students (AAUP, undated). The institution must also insure that students have a wide range of services available to support the distance education programs. This includes access to admissions, financial aid, academic advising, placement and counseling (Commission on Colleges Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACSCOC), 2006). Institutions need to insure that admissions policies, procedures and practices are the same for distance education students as they are for traditional students (CHEA,2002). The institution needs to assess student capability to succeed in the distance education environment and it must provide assistance to students who may experience difficulty with the technology and equipment (CHEA,2002). Additionally, institutions are responsible for maintaining the integrity of student work, including the obligation to verify that the students who sign up for a course are actually the ones taking the course, particularly when it comes to examinations (CHEA, 2002). This lengthy list of institutional obligations represents a significant financial investment by institutions choosing to offer distance education courses. Accrediting organizations look to an institution’s financial capacity to support its distance education programs. They determine whether an institutions budgets and policies reflect its commitment to students (CHEA, 2002, SACSCOC, 2006). Distance education costs should not adversely impact administrative effectiveness, result in faculty overload or cause financial stress or instability (CHEA, 2002). Accreditors also look to see if institutions can support the ongoing expense of frequent technical updates (CHEA, 2002). Colleges and universities need to charge appropriate tuition and fees to support the costs of distance education and to insure it does not cause the institution to lose money (AAUP, undated). The AAUP recommends that individual departments and colleges not incur additional costs for offering distance education courses. The financial support should also include professional development funds for faculty. Many institutions already have funding mechanisms for professional development in place. Such funds would give distance educators funds for new skill development, curricula revision, attendance at professional meetings and the purchase of professional journals and supplies (Benjamin, 2006).
  • At its most basic, a contract is a promise or a performance given in exchange for some type of compensation (Kaplan & Lee, 1995). The three basic elements of the contract are the offer, acceptance of the offer and the compensation or consideration (Kaplan & Lee, 1995). Contracts may be written or oral, though nearly all states have a statute of frauds which requires that certain contracts be in writing in order to be enforceable (Kaplan & Lee, 1995). Although most think of contracts as an exchange (like money for goods) they can also be cooperative arrangements like negotiated agreements (Kaplan & Lee, 1995). The contracts reviewed in this study are negotiated under collective bargaining agreements. Collective Bargaining at public institutions like the community colleges featured in this study is governed by state laws and is generally exempt from the jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board (Kaplan & Lee, 1995). However, since states tend to have a relatively small number of administrative and judicial cases to rely upon for decision making, they look to the federal labor law to fill in any gaps. Thus, the federal law will be discussed here. 35 states and the District of Columbia authorize local boards of community colleges to govern labor (Olivas, 1999, Kaplan & Lee, 1995). There are subjects that the National Labor Relations Act (NRLA) require be covered in collective bargaining. These “mandatory” subjects include “wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment” (29 U.S.C. § 158(d)). This has translated into coverage of management topics like contract management procedures and governance, and academic topics like class size and textbook selection (Cohen & Brawer, 1996, Benjamin, 2006). Labor boards and courts interpret the mandatory subject language broadly and thus almost everything related to institutional function is negotiable (Cohen & Brawer, 1996, Kaplan & Lee, 1995). Most state laws have language similar to the NLRA, though some add or exclude mandatory subjects (Kaplan & Lee, 1995). Parties are required to negotiate in good faith and failure to do so is an unfair labor practice under the NRLA and most state statutes (29 U.S.C. §§ 158(a)(5) and 158(b)(3), Kaplan & Lee, 1995).
  • Sandelowski (2000) describes qualitative descriptive research as being “especially amenable to obtaining straight and largely unadorned (i.e., minimally theorized or otherwise transformed or spun) answers to questions of special relevance to practitioners and policy makers” (p. 337). While qualitative description is often an entry point to a research project, it is also a valuable method in and of itself (Sandelowski, 2000). Content Analysis - Content analysis is the systematic description of the contents of a document Steps Determine objectives Define terms Specify unit of analysis Locate relevant data Link data to objectives Develop sampling plan Code categories Analyze data
  • The Distance Education Policy Analysis Framework has seven policy areas (Academic, Governance/Administration/Fiscal, Faculty, Legal, Student Support Services, Technical, and Cultural). These areas encompass most distance education policies and practices (King, et.al, 2000). King and his colleagues (2000) found that the policy areas represented the main areas of decision making, forming “strategic management decision zones”. These zones are equally useful for providing a way to think about the 31 term categories found in this study. King, et. al. (2000) determined that the seven fundamental policy areas show administrators where they can intervene to manage change in distance education. The addition of term categories to the Framework should facilitate decisions about whether policy or collective bargaining is the most appropriate forum for managing the change. The 31 contract term categories fit nicely into the Distance Education Policy Analysis Framework. Glaringly absent, however, are any terms devoted to the policy area of student support services. An explanation for that might be the nature of state statutes and collective bargaining agreements. Student support services were not included as mandatory negotiating terms in any of the state statutes included in this study. Johnstone (1981) conducted an extensive study of faculty collective bargaining agreements at four-year institutions. He found that the main categories covered were the rights of faculty, primary employment decisions, compensation, fringe benefits, working conditions, professional role and conduct, faculty and academic governance and the relationship of the union with the college or university (Johnstone, 1981). The only area where students came up at all was student involvement in decision-making, and that area was included in only 14% of the contracts studied (Johnstone, 1981).
  • One of the possible “advantages” of distance education is that class size is not limited by the number of seats in a classroom. However, the ability of a teacher to adequately serve a group of students is limited. In community colleges, faculty members rarely have teaching assistants and have to do all of the grading and other course work themselves. Thus, even without the limits of seats, good pedagogy dictate limits to class size. Most institutions capped online classes at the same limit as traditional classes. Some even reduced class size, particularly the first time an instructor taught a distance education course.
  • The Class Size term type referenced the number of students who could enroll in distance education courses. Generally, the term limited class size to a certain number. Fifty-five contracts included restrictions on class size. One of the possible “advantages” of distance education is that class size is not limited by the number of seats in a classroom. However, the ability of a teacher to adequately serve a group of students is limited. In community colleges, faculty members rarely have teaching assistants and have to do all of the grading and other course work themselves. Thus, even without the limits of seats, good pedagogy dictate limits to class size. Most institutions capped online classes at the same limit as traditional classes. Some even reduced class size, particularly the first time an instructor taught a distance education course.
  • The Process term was a broad one, referring to any terms that specified how distance education took place. This included methods of course approval, considerations on when to offer courses, and avenues for the resolution of distance education related problems. Observations. Process was an area that, while appropriate for contractual negotiation, was addressed with equal appropriateness in institutional policy. Thus, despite the frequency of its appearance, institutions may have had distance education processes not mentioned in their contracts.
  • As mentioned previously, the initial creation of a distance education course takes a good deal of time and energy on the part of the faculty member preparing it and on the part of supporting staff and resources. With such an investment, it makes sense to assure the parties that all effort will be made to offer the course and that the person who did all of the work should, for some specified time, have the right to teach it if they choose. The inclusion of this term is also good practice on the part of an institution wishing to encourage greater faculty participation in distance education. If faculty fear that all their hard work will be for nothing, they will be unlikely to take the risk. Scheduling terms can offer some reassurance for all involved.
  • The evaluation of distance education teaching can be a touchy subject. The people who are generally involved in evaluating the instruction – administrators, department heads, fellow faculty – are often relatively unfamiliar with distance education and are unable to effectively evaluate the quality of what they are seeing. To add to this problem, some institutions, in an effort to have all evaluations “the same,” have students and administrators using traditional, campus-based forms and processes which do not apply at all to distance education teaching. For example, a student might be asked whether a faculty member was on time for class or whether they called on students during the class time. How does a distance student answer such questions? Regardless of how such questions are answered, they do not yield useful information about the instruction which occurred. Also, while there are good rubrics for evaluating distance education courses, like the Quality Matters Rubric, there are few widely accepted models for evaluating distance teaching, although models do exist
  • This category is similar to the Scheduling terms in that it offers a level of comfort for the reluctant distance educator. It allows them to know that, if they have gone through all of the work to create a distance education course, they would have the first right to teach it. It is another term that could be helpful to colleges trying to entice more educators into teaching distance education courses.
  • When distance educators expressed that teaching in this modality took more time, email and other communications with students was one of the primary tasks mentioned (AAUP, n.d.b). In recognizing the ability to conduct office hours via email, telephone, and other electronic methods, institutions recognized the unique needs of distance educators. This researcher believes that distance education should, whenever possible, be treated like traditional courses. In this case, however, the opposite may be true - traditional courses may benefit from being treated like distance courses. In community colleges particularly, many students juggle multiple obligations including work and family. It is often difficult for them to attend faculty office hours on campus, and thus, they may communicate more using electronic means, even with traditional faculty. If all faculty had the flexibility to have some of their office hours as online office hours, it might better reflect the reality of all instruction today.
  • This term is distinct from the assessment of online teaching found in the Evaluation terms (addressed in the next section) Assessment is a word frequently heard in higher education circles. However, institutions still struggle with how to effectively evaluate the quality of distance education courses. This is particularly true when the administrators who do the evaluating are completely unfamiliar with distance courses, which is often the case. Excellent tools for evaluating distance courses do exist. One example is the Quality Matters Rubric. It is based on extensive research into pedagogy and best practices in distance instruction (Quality Matters, 2008). The Quality Matters Rubric is based on the belief that that a quality course is indicative of quality instruction. Community colleges throughout the country have adopted or adapted the Quality Matters rubric or similar tools to uniformly and fairly evaluate the quality of online courses.
  • The term defined what institutions meant by “distance education” and related words and phrases.
  • Displacement terms related to personnel decisions that were not traditionally bargainable. Johnstone (1981) noted that academic personnel decisions include a series of discreet steps that are unique to higher education. The decision on whom to hire to teach what was one of those steps. The initial introduction of distance education to a campus can bring with it fear of displacement by those who don’t wish to teach in this format. This term insured that the status quo of traditional instruction would continue, at least for the duration of the agreement. This is a term that will bear watching in future years. As more traditional faculty retire and replacements are hired with the expectation that they will teach distance education courses, there may be fewer instances of the Displacement term in faculty contracts.
  • Shared governance, including committee participation, has always been an essential part of the faculty role in higher education. Indeed, this “management” like role of faculty has made many private university faculty ineligible to form a union under the case of NLRB v. Yeshiva University , 444 U.S. 672 (1980). The Court in Yeshiva found that the full-time faculty members at Yeshiva University were managers and therefore were excluded from the rights to unionize provided by the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. §152(3), 1935). The NLRA and most state bargaining statutes prohibit supervisory personnel from collective bargaining. However, professionals are Shared governance, including committee participation, has always been an essential part of the faculty role in higher education. Indeed, this “management” like role of faculty has made many private university faculty ineligible to form a union under the case of NLRB v. Yeshiva University , 444 U.S. 672 (1980). The Court in Yeshiva found that the full-time faculty members at Yeshiva University were managers and therefore were excluded from the rights to unionize provided by the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. §152(3), 1935). The NLRA and most state bargaining statutes prohibit supervisory personnel from collective bargaining. However, professionals are
  • When campuses first began offering distance education courses, there was often a fear that distance education courses would displace traditional courses. The majority of collective bargaining agreements included in this study included terms to prevent the distance education related displacement of full-time faculty. Priority in course assignments is one more way to insure that full-time faculty and union members are selected before courses are given over to adjunct faculty, particularly those not previously associated with the college. Additionally, the Priority clause often provided protections for the faculty who initially designed the course, whether full- or part-time. Given the large amount of work that can go into the initial offering of a distance education course, priority assignments in subsequent terms can be an added benefit for faculty.
  • Nearly every contract contained terms regarding faculty compensation for distance teaching. This area was quite varied, including compensation for course preparation and revision, for the actual instruction, for mentoring other faculty, as well as compensation for the use of intellectual property (covered in the section in intellectual property). Compensation, or wages, was included as a mandatory bargaining term in every state statute included in this study. Table 4.3 presents examples of compensation terms. The underlying theory behind distance education compensation was the firm belief that distance education courses take more time and effort to teach than traditional courses. It is also notable that distance education courses were not a part of ordinary teaching when many current faculty members were hired. Thus, many faculty members saw distance education courses as above and beyond their “additional duties as required.” As noted, nearly every contract reviewed had a term related to distance education compensation
  • Nearly every contract contained terms regarding faculty compensation for distance teaching. This area was quite varied, including compensation for course preparation and revision, for the actual instruction, for mentoring other faculty, as well as compensation for the use of intellectual property (covered in the section in intellectual property). Compensation, or wages, was included as a mandatory bargaining term in every state statute included in this study. Table 4.3 presents examples of compensation terms. The underlying theory behind distance education compensation was the firm belief that distance education courses take more time and effort to teach than traditional courses. It is also notable that distance education courses were not a part of ordinary teaching when many current faculty members were hired. Thus, many faculty members saw distance education courses as above and beyond their “additional duties as required.” As noted, nearly every contract reviewed had a term related to distance education compensation
  • Every collective bargaining agreement that spoke to this issue permitted faculty to count distance education classes towards their load. However, many limited the total number of distance education courses that would count towards load. Some colleges, like Jacksonville Community College in the example above, were concerned that, if faculty members taught their entire load online, they might not come to campus. This concern is addressed further in the sections on Office Hours and Professional Responsibility.
  • When colleges formally specified release time in collective bargaining agreements, they recognized the concerns of faculty surrounding the time needed to prepare for and teach a distance education course for the first time. If faculty members were reluctant to teach in the distance modality, release time gave them the time needed to get required training, learn new pedagogy, observe the courses of peers, and to become comfortable with the course management software used by the college. As the AAUP noted in the above, release time is useful not just in the term prior to teaching the course, but in the first term of distance instruction as well.
  • When the AAUP first crafted its recommended language on the use of recordings in the mid 1990s, it primarily intended the language to address recordings of interactive television courses. Today, faculty use web cams, narrated PowerPoint lectures, and recordable webinar sessions to teach in the distance format. These recordings are just as protected under this language as the interactive television courses. Although people often strive for detail in negotiated agreements, in the case of distance education technology, more general language may better stand the test of time and rapid changes in technology.
  • The Update term is a subsection of compensation and specifically discusses compensation for the updating of courses This is a controversial topic on many campuses. It can certainly be argued that the initial preparation for a distance education course, particularly by an instructor new to the area, is a large undertaking deserving of additional compensation. The argument, however, is less compelling for the revision of a course. At the point that a course is revised, a faculty member is presumably experienced with distance technologies and familiar with the pedagogical tools that are successful in this medium. Non-distance educators might wonder why distance education course updates are compensated when traditional course updates are not. This author generally recommends that, where possible, distance courses should be treated in the same way as traditional courses. In this situation, rather than defunding the compensation of distance course updates, faculty might argue that all substantial course updates should be funded, whether distance education courses or not.
  • Subcategory of Compensation Experienced distance education faculty members are frequently called on to assist other faculty make the transition to distance teaching. In recognizing the added workload of mentoring, some institutions have included Mentoring terms in faculty-negotiated agreements. While peer mentoring is generally done on an informal basis, some institutions recognize in their collective bargaining agreements the time involved in this additional work. The absence of mentoring terms in a collective bargaining agreement does not indicate that an institution has ignored this issue. Some institutions addressed the need for faculty mentors by staffing their distance education or instructional design departments with faculty members on reassigned time. Others hosted professional development days where experienced faculty gave presentations. Such strategies do not often appear in the collective bargaining agreement.
  • Observations . Intellectual property was one of the AAUP’s key distance education issues and has been a central focus since the organization first started meeting on distance education issues in the mid 1990s. , the AAUP recommended that several components be included in documentation about intellectual property, whether it be policy or contract. Components included a definition of intellectual property, who owned it and who could use it, distribution of funds, and resolution of emerging issues and disputes Lipinski (2003) noted that, in most situations, faculty work should fall under the “work made for hire” doctrine of the Copyright Act. That doctrine states that when a work is “made for hire,” the educational institution (the college) not the person (faculty member) owns the work (Lipinski, 2003). Simonson and Bauck (2003) describe the split in opinion as two opposing sides of the intellectual property equation. On one side is the emphasis on property (Lipinski, 2003) while the other side emphasizes the intellectual aspect (AAUP, n.d.a). teaching exception to copyright law for higher education faculty (Lipinski, 2003). Under this exception, the faculty member would, as the AAUP suggests, own the copyright for work produced on the job. However, this exception is recognized only in a small part of the country, the Seventh Circuit of the US Court of Appeals, and it seems to go against the plain language of the Copyright Act.
  • Work created for distance education can be somewhat different. Unlike traditional course content, this work often includes significant assistance of college staff including instructional designers, graphic artists, institutional technology staff, and the like. When including Sales terms in collective bargaining agreements or policy, the issue of split ownership should be considered. Creating clarity through collective bargaining agreements or policy is advisable. Distance education is often seen as a revenue generator, both by institutions and faculty. The reality seems to be that finding willing buyers for distance education content is rather challenging. All of the institutions covered in this study primarily pursued a model of “growing their own” distance education courses rather than seeking to buy the content of others. However, it is wise to include language that anticipates the possible sale of content created, if for no other reason than to clarify the ownership.
  • for many institutions, negotiating distance education is relatively new, even if distance education has been around on the campus for a long time. Consider the example of Ulster County Community College. This study reviewed three contracts from that institution. In its 2000 contract, there was no mention of distance education, with the exception of the Distance Education coordinator being mentioned in a list of administrators. In its 2004 contract, the only mention of distance education was to say that the college would establish a committee to examine the topic. It was not until the 2008 contract that distance education was fully explored, with 12 distance education terms included. With such gradual adoption of distance education terms, it is not surprising that both unions and administrators choose to allow as much flexibility as possible when exploring distance education issues.
  • Students often turn to faculty as their first option for technical support. If a faculty member is to keep his workload manageable, it is essential for the faculty member to have a reliable and genuinely helpful place to send the students to get help. Faculty themselves also need reliable technical support to be able to teach effectively using technology. Johnstone (1981) noted that “Many agreements speak to the issue of facilities that faculty members need to have if they are to perform their educative role, by calling out the highly specific items that faculty must have” (p. 99). Johnstone includes services like technical support in the “highly specific items.”
  • The AAUP’s suggestion that technology needs be thought out prior to the offering of distance education courses seems an obvious one. However, many colleges have adopted distance education through a very informal process. In many cases, early adopters lead the charge to adopt technology, and they may already have the technology needed to be successful. It is when a campus looks to expand or more formally institutionalize its distance education offerings that more thought is needed for the provision of technology. This term may be included in collective bargaining agreements, but it is also appropriately found institutional policy.
  • The Professional Responsibility term specifically outlined the professional expectations of faculty and is a subtopic of Office Hours. The three Professional Responsibility terms found generally related to the amount of time a faculty member was expected to be on campus. Professional Responsibility, as expressed in these terms, is included under the mandatory negotiating topic of “terms and conditions of employment,” language included in all statutes covered in this study. However, as more and more faculty opt to teach remotely, questions arise as to who will carry the burden on campus, advising students, attending meetings, and the like. This researcher has seen the two extremes – one college where full-time faculty were required to be on campus every contract day regardless of whether they were teaching distance education courses or not.
  • The suggestions of the AAUP (n.d.b) have been helpful to unions in determining how to approach distance education at their institutions. In most cases included in this study, collective bargaining agreements included the AAUP recommended language or something somewhat less protective of faculty. Interestingly, much of the “voluntary” language included in the contracts included in this study contained language that was more stringent than that recommended by the AAUP. The AAUP suggested that faculty not be required to teach in the distance mode without adequate training. Most of the contracts included in the study say that faculty cannot be required to teach in the distance mode at all , regardless of the training provided.
  • Students often turn to faculty as their first option for technical support. If a faculty member is to keep his workload manageable, it is essential for the faculty member to have a reliable and genuinely helpful place to send the students to get help. Faculty themselves also need reliable technical support to be able to teach effectively using technology. Johnstone (1981) noted that “Many agreements speak to the issue of facilities that faculty members need to have if they are to perform their educative role, by calling out the highly specific items that faculty must have” (p. 99). Johnstone includes services like technical support in the “highly specific items.”
  • When colleges expanded into distance education, there was sometimes fear among faculty that their courses or jobs could be endangered. Purpose statements clarified the goals of distance education as a tool to improve teaching and expand learning opportunities for students. Some statements, like the above example from Brookdale Community College, specifically noted that there was no intent to displace faculty.
  • The AAUP recommended that, whenever possible, institutions make distance education courses equivalent to traditional courses. This is an important part of fully integrating distance education into the mainstream of higher education. While some institutions mention this equity of treatment, others do not. If distance education and traditional courses are treated the same, then many institutions found that distance education need not be specifically addressed in the contract. This may be one reason why many institutions that engage in distance education do not mention it in their collective bargaining agreements.
  • This is an interesting term, as in most situations, employees have no reasonable expectation of privacy with work email (Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2008). However, unions have been successful in some cases, as illustrated here, in raising the level of the expectation of electronic privacy. Privacy is not specifically a distance education issue. Generally, all college employees have access to email, regardless of whether they teach distance education courses or not. However, in most distance education settings, the vast majority of individual faculty/student contact occurs via email and other electronic means, as such, is important to include here.
  • Only seven of the 130 collective bargaining agreements reviewed for this study included compensation for technology used in teaching distance education courses. Most institutions adopt the belief that working from home is a choice that faculty make and thus no compensation is needed. Also, if institution-provided technology is available on campus, there is no need to subsidize it in faculty homes. The high costs traditionally associated with the acquisition of computing technology and the high speed internet access needed to teach online effectively may have once been a deterrent to faculty reluctant to teach in the distance format. Thus, the appearance of this term in a contract may reflect a campus trying to motivate more faculty members to teach distance education courses. However, as we enter the second decade of the 21st century, computing technology and high speed internet access are things that most faculty members already have at home, regardless of whether they teach in the distance format. Still, an institution’s efforts to defray those costs would be welcomed by most faculty members.
  • Neither the AAUP nor the vast majority of colleges in this study thought that language regarding competency was essential to include in faculty collective bargaining agreements. This may reflect the relative newness of this method of teaching, as many educators feel ill-qualified to judge the competency of distance education instruction. Also, while there are several tools for evaluating the quality of distance education courses, like the Quality Matters Rubric, there are fewer that determine the competency of the instructor or the quality of distance education teaching. Varvel (2007) established a comprehensive list of distance faculty competencies that colleges can use as a starting point for establishing their own list of relevant competencies.
  • Only four contracts specifically discussed distance education materials. That is because it is a topic that campuses tend to address in policy rather than collective bargaining. The nature of distance education materials is frequently changing and may be more appropriately addressed where it can be changed more easily. Were the topic addressed more as the AAUP recommended, specifying faculty responsibility for content selection, it would be more appropriate for inclusion in a collective bargaining agreement.
  • The Professional Responsibility term specifically outlined the professional expectations of faculty and is a subtopic of Office Hours. The three Professional Responsibility terms found generally related to the amount of time a faculty member was expected to be on campus. Professional Responsibility, as expressed in these terms, is included under the mandatory negotiating topic of “terms and conditions of employment,” language included in all statutes covered in this study. However, as more and more faculty opt to teach remotely, questions arise as to who will carry the burden on campus, advising students, attending meetings, and the like. This researcher has seen the two extremes – one college where full-time faculty were required to be on campus every contract day regardless of whether they were teaching distance education courses or not.
  • Transcript

    • 1. DISTANCE EDUCATION TERMS IN FACULTY COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS Presented by Stephanie Delaney, JD, PhD
    • 2. Problem Context
      • Much more use of distance learning in a relatively short period of time
      • Additional burdens on community college faculty
      • Regularly changing contracts
    • 3. Purpose Statement
      • Identify and analyze the distance education terms typically found in the collective bargaining agreements at community colleges.
    • 4. Review of the Literature
    • 5. Advantages of DE
      • Flexibility
      • Convenience
      • Accessibility
      • Improved pedagogy
    • 6. Disadvantages of DE
      • Takes more time
      • Inappropriate for students who don’t read well
      • Perception of increased workload
      • Quality concerns
    • 7. Workload
      • Technology does not replace faculty work, it layers on top of it
      • Greater time spent engaging with students
      • Greater preparation time
      • Blurred line between work and life
    • 8. Faculty Incentives & disincentives
      • Improved opportunity to reach students
      • Improved teaching
      • Pats on the back
      • Teaching as reward in itself
      • Inadequate financial compensation
      • Lack of rewards
      • Concerns about displacement
      • workload
    • 9. Institutional Support
      • Technical delivery of courses
      • Train faculty to use technology
        • Ongoing
        • Professional development funds
      • Insure quality of courses
      • Student services for remote students
        • Library
        • Advising
        • Access to campus community
    • 10. Collective Bargaining Agreements
      • Collective bargaining Agreements
      • Authorized in 35 states
      • Include “wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment”
    • 11. Method for Qualitative Descriptive Method
      • obtain information about the current status of phenomena
      • seeks to organize large amounts of data and to answer the basic questions of who, what, when, where, and how
      • Content Analysis to analyze data
    • 12. Results
      • 130 agreements
      • 31 Terms Emerged
      • Most numerous
        • Compensation
        • Intellectual property
        • Definitions
        • Load
    • 13. Policy Analysis Framework
      • Planning guidance for distance education policy makers
      • Helps to see gaps in coverage
      • Revealed lack of terms regarding students
    • 14. Policy Analysis Framework Policy Area Key Issues Contract Term Categories Academic Calendar, Course integrity, Transferability, Transcripts, Student/Course evaluation, Admission standards, Curriculum/Course approval, Accreditation, Class cancellations, Course/Program/Degree availability, Recruiting/Marketing Class Size, Scheduling, Right of Refusal, Office Hours, Evaluation, Competency, Quality Governance/Admin/Fiscal Tuition rate, Technology fee, FTE’s, Administration cost, State fiscal regulations, Tuition disbursement, Space, Single versus multiple board oversight, Staffing Committee, Definition, Process, Displacement, Priority Faculty Compensation and workload, Development incentives, Faculty training, Congruence with existing union contracts, Class monitoring, Faculty support, Faculty evaluation Compensation, Training, Equivalency, Use of Recordings, Load, Mentoring, Update, Release Time
    • 15. Policy Analysis Framework (cont) Policy Area Key Issues Contract Term Categories Legal Intellectual property, Faculty, Student and institutional liability Intellectual Property, Sales, Contract Review Technical Systems reliability, Connectivity/access, Hardware/software, Setup concerns, Infrastructure, Technical support (staffing), Scheduling, Costs Technology, Technology Support, Technology Compensation Cultural Adoption of innovations, Acceptance of on-line/distance teaching, Understanding of distance education (what works at a distance), Organizational values Voluntary, Privacy, Professional Responsibility, Purpose
    • 16. Academic
      • Class Size
      • Scheduling
      • Evaluation
    • 17. Class Size
      • Number of students in a course
      • Generally limits
      • 55 instances
      • Mandatory in CA, specifically mentioned in IL
    • 18. Class Size School/Year Language Green River Community College, 2009 b. Class Size: Class size shall be determined in the same manner as traditional classes offered by the college. Broome Community College, 2008 Enrollment - The minimum enrollment required to offer an Internet-based course is eight (8) students for the first time a department offers a course and twelve (12) students thereafter. Faculty members having prior experience teaching Internet-based courses may allow students to enroll as part of an existing on-campus course section but take the course in Internet-based mode. Faculty members must agree in advance to participate in this type of instruction. The intent is to increase student access to college coursework. Edmonds Community College, 2007 With the recommended approval of the Curriculum Committee, the minimum and maximum enrollment standards for a distance learning course may vary from the traditional course depending on the course design, technical instructional assistance, and the amount of instructor/student contact needed to achieve course goals. AAUP Recommendation Enrollment . Determination of class size for a distance education class should be based on pedagogical considerations. Large sections should be compensated by additional credit in load assignment in the same manner as traditional classes. (AAUP, n.d. b)
    • 19. Process
      • How distance education takes place
      • 127 instances
      • Widely varied, multiple terms in contracts
      • Also appropriate for policy
    • 20. Scheduling
      • How distance learning courses scheduled
      • 20 instances
      • Insurance for faculty
    • 21. Evaluation
      • Evaluating teaching
      • 19 instances
      • Mandatory in CA & IA
      • Trouble with evaluations that are “the same” as f2f
    • 22. Right of Refusal
      • Offered first chance to teach course
      • 24 instances
      • Insurance for faculty
    • 23. Office Hours / Time on Campus
      • How faculty spend professional time
      • 24 instances
      • Recommendation: Treat distance and traditional faculty the same
    • 24. Quality / Assessment
      • Quality of distance learning courses
      • 20 instances
      • Struggle for many institutitons
    • 25. Governance
      • Definition
      • Process
      • Displacement
    • 26. Definition
      • Clarifies what is meant by distance education
      • 67 instances
      • Terms changing over time
        • eLearning in WA
    • 27. Definition School/Year Language Blue Mountain Community College, 2010 A. DEFINITION: Distance learning is defined as a formal educational process in which the majority of the instruction occurs when student and instructor are not in the same place. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous. Distance learning may employ, but is not limited to, correspondence study, audio, video, or electronically mediated technologies. Developing distance learning courses is a process of choosing technologies coupled with distance teaching and learning techniques that are appropriate both for the content of the course and needs of the student. Pierce College, 2008 2. An Online Course is defined as a DLC with materials presented primarily online and accessible via the internet, including, but is not limited to, a system of web pages creating a virtual classroom, threaded discussion, listserves, or some proprietary courseware systems.
    • 28. Displacement
      • Prevents distance learning courses from replacing traditional courses
      • 38 instances
      • Expect changes in the future
    • 29. Committee
      • Explanations of distance education committees
      • 23 instances
      • Part of shared governance
    • 30. Priority
      • Who gets priority in assignment
        • Union
        • Full time
        • Course developer
      • 9 instances
      • Similar to 1 st refusal
    • 31. Faculty
      • Compensation
      • Training
      • Load
    • 32. Compensation School/Year Language Brookdale Community College, 2007 8.9 Curriculum development is to be included as part of faculty responsibility except for program/course development including distance learning courses (as defined in Article 25.1), program/course overhaul of a major nature, and new courses. Compensation for new courses or major overhauls including Distance learning shall be determined by petition to the Executive Vice President and determined by her in consultation with the Division Chair, Director or other appropriate supervisor or as the Executive Vice President deems necessary. This decision shall not be grievable or arbitrable. (The form shall be placed as an appendix to the Agreement.)
    • 33. Compensation (cont) School/Year Language North Orange Community College, 2008 15.2.2 At the discretion of the District and subject to staff development funding availability, Unit Members may be eligible for compensation, on a one-time basis, for completion of approved course work and training in the pedagogy and technology of online teaching, which may include the development of an online course as an integral component of such course work or training. Except as provided in this section, no form of remuneration shall be awarded to a Unit Member in conjunction with the development of any distance education course.
    • 34. Compensation (cont) School/Year Language Tomkins Cortland Community College, 2008 18.4 Compensation (a) The compensation for developing on-line course methodology for a course never before offered on-line will be $2320 for a three-credit course the first time a faculty member does so and $1740 every time thereafter, effective September 1, 2003. These figures will be prorated for courses that are other than three credits. These figures will increase in subsequent years by the same percentage as the range movement of faculty salaries. Instructors of synchronous classroom-based sections shall receive an additional one-time payment of a $200 production fee (pro-rated for course of other than three (3) hours of credit) for the instructor’s time to meet with the media staff and for the added complexity of television teaching. (b1) On a cycle to be determined by the College, master course templates for each on-line course will be revised, with the faculty member compensated at a rate of $580 per three-credit course (prorated for courses other than three credits), effective September 1, 2003. This figure will increase in subsequent years by the same percentage as the range movement of faculty salaries.
    • 35. Compensation
      • Mandatory term
      • 113 instances
      • reflects belief that teaching distance education courses is beyond “other duties as assigned”
    • 36. Training
      • Requires faculty have access to training opportunities
      • 38 instances
      • Controversial if mandatory
    • 37. Load
      • Teaching load
      • 54 instances
      • Implications of entire load online
    • 38. Release Time
      • Time to prepare for or teach distance learning course
      • 24 instances
      • Important motivator for faculty
    • 39. Use of Recordings
      • How recordings used
      • 20 instances
      • Meaning changing over time
    • 40. Update
      • Compensation for updating course
      • 10 instances
      • Recommendation: treat courses the same
    • 41. Mentoring
      • Compensation for assisting others
      • 5 instances
      • Key way faculty learn distance learning pedagogy
    • 42. Legal
      • Intellectual Property
      • Sales
      • Contract Review
    • 43. Intellectual Property
      • Copyright, ownership, sale
      • 84 instances
      • Subject of AAUP guidance document
    • 44. Intellectual Property (cont) School/Year Language Camden County College, 2006 8. For the purpose of this section the generic components of a distance learning course is understood to mean the platform, courseware, shell or course management system. The intellectual property of a distance learning course is understood to mean the section specific content of the distance learning course that is created solely by the faculty member. Intellectual property does not include content or material that was not created solely by the faculty member, but was incorporated from other sources. All intellectual property of a distance learning course shall be considered to be unique and exclusive property of the faculty member. In the event, a faculty member chooses to contract away his/her exclusive right to his/her intellectual property of a distance learning course, the College shall have the right of first refusal. The generic components of a distance learning course shall be the exclusive property of the College.
    • 45. Intellectual Property (cont) School/Year Language AAUP Recommendation Intellectual Property, Ownership of Materials The materials created by faculty members for distance education courses should be treated in exactly the same fashion as materials created by faculty members for traditional courses. (AAUP, n.d. b)
    • 46. Sales
      • Specifics on ability to sell course
      • 14 instances
      • Clarifies ownership issues
    • 47. Contract Review
      • Reopener for distance education sections of agreement
      • 17 instances
    • 48. Technical
      • Technology
      • Tech Support
      • Tech compensation
    • 49. Tech Support School/Year Language Centralia Community College, 2008 Section 6. Support. A. Technical support necessary for class delivery will be provided by the College. B. The College will make every effort to provide access to equipment necessary for effective delivery of distance education. C. If a distance education instructor travels to a site, the College will compensate for travel in accordance with state policies.
    • 50. Tech Support School/Year Language Community Colleges of Spokane, 2008 Section 1. Support for Distance Education CCS and AHE recognize that distance education may require additional technological support, training, and development. To ensure educational quality, faculty and administration that engage in distance education shall mutually agree on the necessary support services, technology, development release/funding, and training to ensure educational quality. In addition, faculty engaged in online instruction should expect appropriate, ongoing, technical support. Available support resources will be identified and communicated to faculty by college administration.
    • 51. Tech Support (cont) School/Year Language Peninsula College, 2009 15.1.1 The College will provide both the training and technical support necessary for academic employee to teach distance learning mediated curricula. 15.1.1 Academic employees are not responsible for providing technical support to students or for equipment used by students. 15.1.1 The college will adopt a course management platform(s) and will provide technical support to academic employee teaching Web-mediated classes using the approved platform(s). Other platforms may not be eligible for technical support. AAUP Recommendation The institution shall ensure that the necessary technology and equipment is identified and in place, that the institution shall provide appropriate training for faculty members, and that the institution shall ensure that faculty members have access to adequate technical support personnel” (AAUP, n.d. b).
    • 52. Technology
      • Hardware and software provided by institution
      • 13 instances
      • Often in policy rather than agreement
    • 53. Cultural
      • Voluntary
      • Professional Responsibility
      • Privacy
    • 54. Professional Responsibility School/Year Language Blue Mountain Community College 2010 . . . Faculty have the responsibility to explore and to develop creative options for instructional delivery and to plan programs and curricula that are flexible and responsive to the needs of all students. Community Colleges of Spokane 2008 c. Accessibility to Students and Professional Responsibilities: In Distance Learning Courses which employ computer or telephone interactivity, faculty members shall be able to conduct a proportionate part of their office hours via email, telephone, or equivalent one-on-one alternatives. Faculty members who telecommute must meet other professional responsibilities on campus as necessary. Green River Community College 2009 f. Incremental Improvements: It is recognized that instructors will continuously strive to improve courses by making continuous minor modifications as the course is offered, evaluated, and student progress is assessed. Such incremental improvement may increase the instructor’s equity in the course, provided that prior discussion and agreement as to the nature of the improvements and the increased equity in the course have been established in writing and by mutual agreement prior to undertaking such improvements.
    • 55. Voluntary
      • Faculty can’t be forced to teach online
      • 39 instances
      • Colleges studied more stringent than AAUP
    • 56. Technology Support
      • How faculty can expect to be supported
      • 31 instances
      • Important to keeping workload manageable
    • 57. Intent / Purpose
      • Reason for distance learning
      • 20 instances
      • Explanations include:
        • Improve teaching
        • Expanding opportunity
        • Not replacing faculty
    • 58. Equivalency
      • Distance education course equivalent to traditional course
      • 18 instances
      • May negate need for specific DE terms in agreement
    • 59. Security / Privacy
      • Expectation of electronic privacy
      • 8 instances
      • Generally no expectation of privacy, negotiated raised level
    • 60. Technology Compensation
      • Pay for individual technology expenses
      • 7 instances
      • Changing with cheaper technology
    • 61. Competency
      • Require faculty to be competent
      • 5 terms
      • Few methods for judging competency
    • 62. Materials
      • Which materials included in distance education course
      • Subtopic of definition
      • 4 instances
      • Usually addressed in policy or not addressed at all
    • 63. Professional Responsibility
      • Generally covered time on campus
      • Subtopic of office hours
      • 3 instances
      • “ terms and conditions of employment” - mandatory
    • 64. Explanation of Findings
      • More terms out there than commonly thought
      • Helpful to compare and contrast
    • 65. Recommendations
      • Track changes over time
      • Impact of terms on faculty participation
      • Compare different kinds of institutions
    • 66. Questions?

    ×