RECOMMENDED GUIDING PRINCIPLE YES:

Transcription

1 Response from: MnSCU-Lumina Graduate Minnesota Program Charting the Future of Minnesota State Colleges and Universities: Draft Report of the Strategic Workgroups 1 RECOMMENDED GUIDING PRINCIPLE YES: Make a stronger statement regarding the importance of external partnerships. Transform Minnesota State Colleges and Universities to better meet the needs of our students, our community partners and our state by: Combining the reports from the three workgroups into one set of strategic recommendations is helpful and makes commenting on the information manageable. However, some of the recommendations are unclear. Following are suggestions to promote clarity: Increase clarity and precision of language to add substantial value and impact to this report. Consider hiring an external professional editor who can ensure this report is well-understood by all. Forging deeper collaborations among our colleges and universities and system office. Fully leveraging our collective strengths, resources and human capital. Greater collaboration, cooperation, communication, coordination within the system is imperative for our system s future success. We must avoid competition among our institutions as much as possible. Unfortunately, some existing processes that have strengthened collaboration/communication (such as GPS Lifeplan and efoliomn) have had dramatically diminished support and there seems to be more a sense of each campus on its own. However, 2013 legislative action requires the MnSCU system to extend support of e-folio and GPS Lifeplan for two more years. Therefore, we should build on existing infrastructure (for example: Minnesota Learning Commons, GPS Lifeplan, efolio, online student services, MnSCU Online Support Center, ISEEK, military services, Minnesota Online portal, Metro Alliance, etc.) Sustain existing levels of support and expand strategically. Avoid replacing existing models whenever possible. Identify and use existing and emerging models (such as Southeast Minnesota Consortium) from grassroots where possible, rather than re-creating models from the top down. Audit existing programs to identify gaps in our offerings and services; then address the gaps. Build on existing infrastructure (for example: Minnesota Learning Commons, GPS Lifeplan, efolio, online student services, MnSCU Online Support Center, ISEEK, military services, Minnesota Online portal, Metro Alliance). Sustain existing levels of support and expand strategically. Increase awareness of free courses and services to consumers, including HippoCampus. Identify programs to be replicated, expanded, relocated or cloned: for example, Credit for Prior Learning (CPL), Military (VETS), Credit When It s Due (reverse transfer), Power of YOU ( etc. Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 1 Denise.stephens@so.mnscu.edu; (651)

2 Strengthening partnerships with businesses, public agencies, public and private higher education, K-12 and community based organizations to ensure an educated workforce. 15 Priority 2: Certify the competencies our graduates have mastered Create a statewide certification mechanism for a competency-based award of credit and degrees, including credit for prior learning. Suggested new language. Add a third bullet under the Guiding Principles to emphasize the importance of external partnerships, especially with public agencies such as DEED, MWCA, local Workforce Boards, etc., to our colleges and universities and the system. This strategic direction is prevalent throughout Charting the Future, but elevating it to the level of a guiding principle increases its importance. YES: This should be a high priority. A faculty-driven process should build on programs and processes already in place. Suggested edited language: Create a system-wide team of subject matter experts in Prior Learning Assessment and Credit for Prior Learning. Identify and apply consistent processes, including credit for prior learning; to document, assess, and transcribe student competencies to award credit and degrees. This recommendation in Charting the Future needs clarification. Rather than creating a mechanism, use subject matter experts to identify and build on/promote existing processes (such as testing, Getting Credit for What You Know, Prior Learning Assessments and Self Directed Learning processes) and develop new processes (possibly statewide options similar to ACE or Professional Development Institute) only for areas not currently addressed. Create a faculty-driven process to define shared standards of student competencies within disciplines and departments. Focus initially on developing standardized learner outcomes for developmental education and gateway courses. Suggested edited language: Using a faculty-driven process, define learner outcomes that are shared across disciplines and departments. Focus As stated in Charting the Future, the focus here is on a process, but a better focus would be on learner outcomes. Build on an existing model, such as Minnesota Transfer Curriculum (MnTC) process, which defines competence/goal and specifies learning outcomes for other key areas. Adapt/apply the MnTC approach to developmental/gateway courses. Also build on articulation agreements (dozens exist) that honor work across the system. This recommendation could be challenging regarding majors/minors, for example: upper/lower division/academic freedom/intellectual property issues. Another challenge is defining standards of student competencies/outcomes in disciplines and departments (beyond MnTC, etc.) Questions of lower/upper division, academic freedom, curricular purposes and integrity play in. Convene a faculty-driven, statewide process to develop consistent methods of evaluation for credit for prior learning experiences for course and credit equivalences across our colleges and universities. Suggested edited language: Expand credit for prior learning, in a consistent way, and with substantial direction, training, and support, using a faculty-driven statewide process to ensure transferability. This is the recommendation of most interest to our team of Subject Matter Experts, but it needs clarification. Our statewide conferences in Spring 2013 confirm there is great interest in expanding CPL, but Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 2

3 consistency, direction, training and support are imperative to success across the system. Although consistent methods of evaluation are needed, they are not the highest priority. To further explain our thinking on this statement: a. All institutions should offer CPL and provide expanded options for CPL. At the very least they should use CPL in ways it is mandated (application of CLEP, DSST, etc.) and clearly communicate that to students. Offerings are inconsistent across the system. For example, more should offer portfolio-based assessments, credits based on ACE recommendations for military and workforce training, credits for certain scores on national exams, etc. All institutions SHOULD administer CLEP and DSST exams and if not on their site, should communicate where/how these exams can be taken, how results are communicated to student records and how the credits apply (system-wide, they apply to MnTC.) b. Many components of campus CPL offerings should be made more consistent, including but not limited to the methods of evaluation. (The available methods of evaluation are listed in the relevant Board Procedure.) For example, efolio questionnaires (used for Minnesota Transfer Curriculum) clearly outline the system-wide accepted competencies and outcomes and provide a good model. c. To move forward, campuses need direction, training and support to develop and/or expand their CPL programs, policies, and procedures. Campuses need greater understanding of how CPL is appropriate and desirable to serve students and advance the system s and each institution s mission. For example, statewide training, samples, examples, sharing, facilitation, consultation, etc. would all be helpful. More specifically, consistent CPL policies and procedures should include: a. Language build on the list of CPL-related terms defined in relevant MnSCU board procedure. System-level leadership (or any system-wide coordination) on CPL will naturally work in the direction of developing common language. b. Programs take an inventory and leverage CPL program components from all MnSCU institutions (manuals / handbooks for faculty and/or for students, methods, mechanisms, portfolio courses, course-specific exams where appropriate, forms, web content, professional development, workflow diagrams, etc.) Identify and promote best practices from within MnSCU and elsewhere to all MnSCU institutions. Build on and share information and materials to contribute to campus support. c. Assessors the expectations for assessors must be clear and consistent (for example, is assessing CPL a standard part of the expectations for faculty? If so, how much?) Provide training and support, and clarify arrangements concerning payment and load. Consider creating a pool of assessors across MnSCU. Create a certification process for non-faculty assessors. Connect where Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 3

4 needed/appropriate with CAEL s national roster of evaluators. d. Transcription should be competency-based, regardless of the learning method. a. Consistent coding within ISRS is necessary. b. Agree on transferability of competence-based award of credit, including credit for prior learning. c. Provide the means for awarding credit for student competency that is not courseequivalent. e. Outreach and promotion of CPL to students and potential students should be frequent, consistent, and comprehensive. Work with other colleges and universities, partners in business and industry, and K-12 institutions where appropriate to create statewide competency-based exams to demonstrate student mastery. Expand students applied learning opportunities aligned with industry recognized competencies such as apprenticeships, workrelated or on-the-job training, internships or dual training models. Invest in faculty experiences with industry to enhance faculty knowledge of current and emerging technical and foundational skills and competencies, technology and equipment. Suggested edited language: Allow students to demonstrate mastery through the statewide, consistent use of competency-based exams. Leverage existing (third-party or college-specific) certifications and exams when appropriate, or create new exams when necessary. Work closely with stakeholders to forge agreement on use of exams. Rather than create new models, leverage existing campus models. Create statewide competency-based exams only when standard exams are not sufficient. We should continue to improve the ways we serve military service members and veterans with respect to CPL. In particular, expanded use of the VETS system goes well beyond using ACE credit recommendations. The VETS system allows individual credit award decisions to be leveraged not only by students with that same specific military occupation, but with multiple other military occupations, and also with students at any MNSCU campus. GREAT: Knows and can apply!!! This recommendation is desirable but not a priority for all institutions. Expand our colleges and universities Review of measures such as national exams to identify what a student knows and can demonstrate Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 4

5 participation in quality assurance measures that are benchmarked with similar institutions through partnerships with other higher education institutions or through third party evaluations. competency is important to ensure the quality of our graduates. Promote the use of Quality Matters frameworks rubric in universal course design. 17 Priority 3: Increase access to our colleges and universities and accelerate the educational success of diverse students Target outreach to and engagement with diverse communities to expand partnerships to increase access, increase student success, and reduce the achievement gap. YES: this should be a priority. However, adults over 25 should also be considered diverse students with unique needs for educational success. Suggested edited language: Priority 3: Increase access to our colleges and universities, fortify academic success, and accelerate educational progress of an increasingly diverse body of students. Suggested edited language: To increase access and student success among underserved students of color, increase engagement and expand partnerships with external partners. Minnesota s achievement gap is an overall concern. Identify and build on existing strategies within institutions that show promise. Use strategies developed through programs such as the Office of Multiculturalism and Diversity and veterans initiatives. Expand and deepen partnerships with K-12 and adult basic education (ABE) to increase college readiness and promote opportunities for students who are college-ready to access college level courses tuition-free while in high school. Serve adult students extremely well, by reconfiguring education and services to meet and exceed the distinct needs of this increasingly important demographic, including using PLA as a method to demonstrate competencies, and expanding flexible Suggested edited language: To better serve students who are college-ready and almost college-ready, expand and deepen partnerships with K-12 and adult basic education (ABE), in part by promoting opportunities to access tuition-free college level courses while in high school. Ensure that legislative mandates, including Individual Learning Plans, are considered and implemented through partnerships with K-12 and ABE. Students who can access college level courses tuition free may pass the basic classes, accumulate credits and meet some requirements; but they may not be prepared for more rigorous study. Include online options: they are less expensive and more geographically convenient, which is important for adult students, students of color, rural students, and all students with transportation challenges. Suggested new bullet for strategy on services needing development to increase engagement, retention and persistence. Provide and promote college readiness options for returning adult students (who are not ABE), particularly in math and writing, but also basic computer skills. Expand existing models that have proven to be effective, such as the Ronald M. Hubbs Center and community education programs. Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 5

6 scheduling options and college readiness programs. Ensure communication and training of campus staff to increase awareness of resources. Cultivate strong campus climates through strengthening intercultural competencies and focusing on providing for diversity among our faculty, staff and leadership. Promote the expansion of flexible scheduling options to meet student needs including weekend cohorts, blended learning and chunked courses. Keep college affordable and assist students to find and make good financial choices about their education. Suggested edited language: To increase success among underserved students of color, cultivate stronger campus climates through strengthening intercultural competencies and promoting diversity among our faculty, staff, and leadership. It is difficult to understand what is meant by strengthening intercultural competencies or providing for diversity. These phrases need clarification. Because this bullet relates directly to students, consider moving this bullet to the top of this section as bullet #2. Suggested edited language: Expand flexible options, especially for adult learners, to include weekend cohorts, blended learning and chunked courses. Provide support for faculty training in non-standard instructional delivery. These options are excellent for adult learners. Reconsider the common calendar which requires all learning to be completed and evaluation submitted by a common date. Consider non-credit to credit courses. Also, eliminate barriers so resident/commuter students have open access to online learning options. Consider moving this strategy to combine it with other strategies related directly to student success. Suggested new bullet for strategy on services needing development related to financial aid and affordability. Expand and promote viable/affordable options for students, including credit for prior learning, accelerated courses, theory seminars, e-services, financial aid for part-time students and e- learning. 19 Priority 4: Create a comprehensive, statewide e- education strategy. Create a web-based portal as a single point of entry for our students seeking online educational programming and services using our colleges and universities existing, YES: This should be a priority. Ensure integrity and quality of all MnSCU educational programs. Build on existing portals that work well, such as Minnesota Online and Minnesota Learning Commons. Clarify and simplify processes for registration, course delivery and electronic student support across the system. Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 6

7 accredited range of e-education program offerings and services. Deliver an array of student and academic affairs services through e-education, including: o Orientation to online learning and assessments to help learners determine whether online learning meets their needs; o Placement and proctored testing including authentication of the learner; o Library services; o Online tutoring and advising; o Online personal and career counseling; and o Student life and career job placement services. Certify the quality of all new online courses and programs through a statewide, facultydeveloped, academically rigorous standard for all new online courses legislative action requires the MnSCU system to extend support of e-folio and GPS Lifeplan for two more years. Therefore, we should build on existing infrastructure (for example: Minnesota Learning Commons, GPS Lifeplan, efolio, online student services, ISEEK, MnSCU Online Support Center, military services, Minnesota Online portal, etc.) Build on and expand campus-based models that could work statewide (for example, Metro State s library system.) Identify and expand community resources and sites for proctored testing within and beyond Minnesota, especially for military and online students. Career counseling is an important component of student advising to ensure student success: both high tech and high touch resources are needed to help students be successful while in college and after graduation. Explanation for suggested language change: People are placed in a job that builds toward a career. However, many students may need assistance with career exploration and counseling before seeking their education and job. Promote the use of quality matters frameworks rubric in universal course design. The accepted MnTC process that identifies goals and outcomes for general education can be a model. But there are differences in lower/upper division, type of applications, etc. There may, however, be areas where faculty across the system will collaborate to develop quality programs (nursing and aviation are two existing examples). 21 Priority 5: Deliver leading edge continuing education and customized training to students and employers through statewide collaboration. Identify and document consistent processes to evaluate competencies achieved through MnSCU-created non-credit courses and customized training to award credit for prior learning. YES: This should be a priority. Partnerships and collaboration are mandatory for success. Suggested new bullet: Add another bullet to include a strategic priority on assessing and awarding credit for learning through MnSCU-created non-credit courses or programs. Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 7

8 23 Priority 6: Enable the recommended strategic priorities to be realized by redesigning the system s financial and governance model. Accelerate the building of shared services through the Campus Service Cooperative and similar efforts. Common services should be expanded to include: predictive analytics, course and program development, student support, and coordinated academic planning. YES: This should be a priority. Involve all stakeholders early in discussions regarding potential changes. Utilize expertise and build on existing shared services models within the system and expand as appropriate. For example, the MnSCU-Lumina Graduate Minnesota program has been able to mine the system data to identify students with potential for degree completion. Credit When It s Due (reverse transfer) efforts have identified and granted degrees. These programs provide positive models for shared services that will serve students and promote collaboration among MnSCU institutions. Negotiate changes to modify existing bargaining agreements to promote expanded collaboration and cooperation across our colleges and universities. This effort may consider the renegotiation and merging of agreements based on type of work performed rather than institutional type and/or the modification of the definition of workload to include options beyond duty day/credit hour. Contract modifications could also enable shared staff, shared assignments, and cross-campus worksites. Reward colleges and universities for efforts that promote system success. Provide stronger incentives within the design of our allocation formula for colleges and universities to collaborate. Potential changes in collective bargaining should be discussed now to promote expanded collaboration and rethink different models. Engaging faculty across the system about potential contract changes is essential. Yes, but utilize expertise and build on examples of collaborative efforts that promote system success: Graduate Minnesota (degree completion and CPL), Credit When It s Due (reverse transfer), reduction of achievement gaps, etc. Contact: Denise Stephens, Grant Program Manager Page 8