NC States QEP: Learning in a TechnologyRich Environment

1
NC States QEPLearning in a Technology-Rich
Environment

• Ephraim Schechter
• September 23, 2004
• Western Carolina University

2
LITRE

• Todays topics
• Whats LITRE?
• How we got there
• Tips from our experience

3
LITRE is...

• Applied research
• Technology-enhanced approaches to
  teaching/learning are
• Explored
• Assessed for impact
• Results inform broader deployments, future
  projects
• LITRE website http//litre.ncsu.edu

4
Major themes

• Students/faculty engage with technology for
  learning/teaching
• Impact on student learning outcomes
• Supportive technological/pedagogical environments
  

5
LITRE projects link to

• General education goals
• College / department / program / course
  curriculum objectives
• Outcomes-based academic program review

6
First initiatives

• Monitor faculty/student experiences attitudes
• Document campus classroom technology
• Classroom/course-based pilot projects
• Faculty grants for new projects
• Details available on LITRE website

7
Management

• Directed by a faculty member
• Experienced in LITRE areas
• On full released time as Special Assistant to the
  Provost
• Faculty/staff Advisory Board
• Special-purpose committees

8
How we got there Choosing the topic

• Small planning group identified potential project
  areas
• Deans key groups winnowed the list
• Executive officers selected LITRE
• Campus groups developed the details

9
Guidelines

• Related to student learning
• Achieves something we want to achieve
• Supported by assessment, with assessable impact
• Engages the academic community
• Capacity/commitment for 5 years
• One topic is better than two
• Dont highlight compliance issues

10
Tips from our experience

• Some projects are already too far along
• Dont interfere with existing projects
• Everyone wants to be involved but umbrella
  topics arent manageable
• Emphasize a strength

11
Developing the details

• Started at same time as Compliance Team
• Selected topic
• Created LITRE Team to develop it
• Co-chairs faculty member, IT administrator
• Small Leadership team plus
• Steering team
• Advisory committee
• Topical work groups

12
Developing the details

• Work groups
• Review campus resources/issues, peer
  institutions, literature
• Propose approaches, projects
• Areas
• Educational infrastructure
• Student information fluency
• Faculty engagement
• Learning resources / educational technology
• E-learning environments

13
Developing the details

• Faculty survey informs work group discussions
• Campus forums respond to work group reports
• Early issues wish lists
• Later specific proposals
• Advisory committee / steering team winnow
  proposals
• Potential for immediate impact
• Existing campus involvement
• Probable funding constraints
• Provost and Chancellor decide what to fund

14
Writing the report

• Editorial board writer
• Near the end of the development process
• Combine/summarize preliminary reports
• Adapt rationales, etc. from campus presentations
• Edit for consistent tone
• Available from LITRE website

15
Tips from NC States experience

• Everybody wants a piece of the QEP pie
• Build assessment in from the beginning
• Develop management structure as you go
• Leave plenty of time at the end to
• Negotiate final selections, budget details, etc.
  with your executive officers
• Get feedback on final draft(s)

16
Tips from NC States experience

• Process or project?
• Dont leave exercise for the reader
• Insiders make assumptions
• Have outsiders review the drafts
• Workgroup size
• Small groups are easier to manage
• Large groups give more campus involvement

17
Think about

• What does SACS want?
• What are your current issues? Which ones can be
  turned into effective QEPs? Why?
• What planning approach fits WCUs style?

18

• LITRE website http//litre.ncsu.edu
• Ephraim I. Schechter, Ph.D.
• University Planning Analysis
• North Carolina State University
• 919 / 515-2776
• eischech_at_unity.ncsu.edu