Meeting the Needs of Diverse Students Engaging in e-learning, Phase II: Collaborative Policy Development to Enhance Online Learning

Transcription

1 Meeting the Needs of Diverse Students Engaging in e-learning, Phase II: Collaborative Policy Development to Enhance Online Learning FINAL REPORT Submitted to: Author: Contact: ecampusalberta Dean Wood, Ph.D. Russ Wilde, MDE Director, Learning Resource Services Telephone: Date:

2 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS... 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND, RATIONALE, AND PROJECT GOAL PROJECT PROCESSES Project Origins Developing the Project Plan Literature Review Policy Development Workshop Developing Sample Policies and Pilot College Policies Deliverables Project Limitations OBSERVATIONS CONTINUING ACTIVITIES REFERENCES APPENDICES APPENDIX A WORKSHOP AGENDA APPENDIX B - POLICY TOOLKIT AND SAMPLE POLICIES Page 2 of 65 August 31, 2010

3 Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge and thank the following individuals and their institutions and organizations for their commitment to this project and for the input they provided as part of the Steering Committee, the policy workshop, and the policy development teams. Steering Committee members: Karen O Dwyer, Lethbridge College Russ Wilde, Bow Valley College Dr. Pamela Young, NorQuest College (until June 30, 2011) Glenn Mitchell, Northern Lakes College Bev Moghrabi, Portage College Lynn Connell, Bow Valley College Pat Bidart, Olds College (until June 30, 2011) Eleanor Frandsen, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Alice McNair, Red Deer College Dr. Tricia Donovan, ecampusalberta Jesal Odedra, ecampusalberta Dale Unrau, Alberta Advanced Education and Technology Policy Development Workshop: Brenda Reitsma, NorQuest College Carole Calenso-Fair, Olds College Karen Fiege, Bow Valley College Bill McMullen, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Robin Minion, Olds College Charlene Jones, Red Deer College Liz O Shea, Bow Valley College Pilot college policy projects: Dr. Gerry Paradis, Red Deer College Darlene Johnson, Red Deer College Susan Spence, Red Deer College Ken Kaldenhoven, NorQuest College Andrew Jevne, NorQuest College Ann Nikolai, NorQuest College Flo Brokop, NorQuest College Mark Karstad, NorQuest College Phil Chatters, NorQuest College Christie Robertson, NorQuest College Barb Pearce, NorQuest College Erwin Ens, NorQuest College Lana Vandenberghe, NorQuest College Linda Raposo, NorQuest College Laurie Smith, NorQuest College Janice Mills, NorQuest College Karen Bennett, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Nancy Milakovic, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Rhonda Betker, Northern Alberta Institute of Technology The funding support provided by ecampusalberta is appreciated, and, in particular, we want to thank Dr. Tricia Donovan for her untiring commitment to excellence in online learning which was an important impetus for the project. Vice-Presidents Anna Kae Todd (Learning) and Deborah Achen (Enrolment and Learner Services) at Bow Valley College supported the project and kept its profile high with their colleagues in the Senior Academic Officers and Senior Student Services Officers groups. A very special expression of appreciation is extended to Dr. Dean Wood. Dean was contracted by BVC College to lead this initiative, and turn the initial conception of the project into a meaningful process with an outcome that will result in significant change in the policies of participating institutions. His in-depth understanding of how post secondaries work, along with the high regard by the stakeholders, fostered the engagement of a motivated Steering Committee and working groups that led to the success of this project. The at Bow Valley College has been responsible for the implementation of the project. We want to thank Agnes (Scottie) Ray, Kate Beamer and Natalia Rostova for their contributions and the excellence of their work. Rena Shimoni, Ph.D. Dean, Applied Research and Innovation Russ Wilde, M.Sc. Director, Learning Resource Services Page 3 of 65 August 31, 2010

4 Executive Summary In 2010 Bow Valley College (BVC) completed two research studies on behalf of a consortium of Alberta institutions which demonstrated the need for dramatic improvements in learner services provided to online learners particularly diverse learners. The researchers surveyed students, staff, and administrators from the participating institutions: Bow Valley, Lethbridge, NorQuest, Northern Lakes, Olds and Red Deer colleges as well as the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology. In addition, representatives from community adult learning organizations and government ministries were interviewed. The Steering Committee (SC) for the research projects--representing the eight participating institutions, ecampusalberta and Advanced Education and Technology determined that the most effective way to foster improvement in learner services was to focus on institutional policy development as a change process. Phase II funding for one of the projects, provided by ecampusalberta, was utilized to support a 12 month project involving more than 40 people from the institutions, ecampusalberta, and Alberta Advanced Education and Technology. The executive co-sponsors for the project were Vice-Presidents Anna Kae Todd and Deborah Achen from BVC and the project stakeholders were the Vice-Presidents, Academic of the participating institutions. The goal of the project was to support colleges/institutes in developing new policies and/or adapting existing policies that are consistent with institutional commitments to providing diverse, distributed learners with learner services that are equivalent to the services provided to on-campus learners. This goal is based on two assumptions. First, the delivery of a best practice level of service by post-secondary institutions requires a policy framework to ensure institutional support for these service levels. Second, enhanced services for online and off-campus learners will increase learner retention, academic achievement, and satisfaction. The first major project activity included an exhaustive literature search to identify professional and research literature related to services for online learners, online learning policies, and institutional policy development processes. The search indicated that relatively little institutional policy development in support of online learning, particularly learner services, had occurred in the English-speaking world. Even with that limitation, appropriate materials were available to support the development of the toolkit and subsequent project activities. The second major project activity was a two-day policy development workshop held in February 2011 at Bow Valley College. Seventeen staff from the participating institutions, ecampusalberta, and Alberta Advanced and Education and Technology along with the Project Team explored the purpose of institutional policies and policy development processes. They then broke into four teams to identify the policy statement, rationale, scope, definitions, and procedures which should be included in sample policies in the four areas identified by the SC: universal design for learning, instructor development and Page 4 of 84 August 31, 2010

5 support, service delivery for online and off-campus learners, and a comprehensive institutional policy. After the workshop, the Project Lead worked with each team to finalize the documents. The third major project activity included four institutions NorQuest College, Olds College, Red Deer College, and NAIT developing policies for eventual adoption by their internal academic governance process. Each institution developed a policy in one of the four areas identified above. The process was led by an individual who had participated in the workshop working under the direction of the Vice- President, Academic. Five of the six project deliverables are included in this report: 1. Policy toolkit This document in Appendix B presents essential information about the role of policy in institutional change, the process of institutional policy development, and the elements which can be included in an institutional policy in one of the four areas. It is designed to be a resource to institutions undertaking policy development or policy revision in the area of online learning. 2. Sample policies The second and third deliverables include four sample policies which are presented as a part of the toolkit in Appendix B. These sample policies are models which an institution can use to develop a policy customized to its own context. 3. Draft policies from pilot colleges The policies are presented in Appendix C. At this time (August 2011), these exist in draft form, and they will be submitted for institutional policy approval in the fall of They are included in this accountability report in draft form but should not be circulated. This report constitutes the fifth deliverable. The project origins and processes are outlined in detailed. In addition, there is an Observations section which provides reflections about the collaborative nature of the project, the importance of learner services in online delivery, the role of policy in fostering organizational change, and strategies for ensuring an equivalent level of service is provided to online learners. In addition, continuing activities to facilitate knowledge transfer among participating institutions, other Campus Alberta institutions, and beyond have been identified. The project evaluation the sixth deliverable - will reflect the perspectives of the stakeholders about the process described in the report with an emphasis on what can be learned about collaborative processes within and between post-secondary institutions. A second evaluation will gauge the actual impact of the project on policy changes within colleges. The first will be completed by the end of 2011 and the second will be completed by the end of Page 5 of 65

6 1. Background, Rationale, and Project Goal In 2010 Bow Valley College (BVC) completed two related research projects that will set the bar for improved learner support services for distributed learners. First, the Successful Practices in Supporting Students in Distributed Learning (Shimoni, Barrington, & Wilde, 2010) report (Successful Practices) was the result of a collaborative research effort that involved eight Campus Alberta member institutions (Bow Valley, Lethbridge, NorQuest, Northern Lakes, Olds, Portage, and Red Deer colleges as well as the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology) and was funded through the Alberta Advanced Education and Technology Access to the Future Fund. The purpose of the project was to explore successful practices in distributed learning and the organizational and administrative policies, procedures, and supports that are behind these best practices. Second, the Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners Engaging in e-learning (Shimoni & Barrington, 2010) project (Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners) interacts fully with the larger study and focuses on the specific needs of diverse student populations engaged in online learning. The project was funded by ecampusalberta and designed across a two-year time frame. The project has two phases. Phase I assessed the needs of diverse learners and developed recommendations for the provision of quality online learning to diverse students. The goal of Phase II of the Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners project, as determined by the joint Steering Committee (SC) for both studies, was to support colleges/institutes in developing new policies and/or adapting existing policies that are consistent with institutional commitments to providing diverse, distributed learners with learner services that are equivalent to the services provided to oncampus learners. This goal is based on two assumptions. First, the delivery of a best practice level of service by post-secondary institutions requires a policy framework to ensure institutional support for these service levels. Second, enhanced services for online and off-campus learners will increase learner retention, academic achievement, and satisfaction. The project was designed to do the following: 1. Develop tools and processes for conducting policy reviews, revising existing policies, and developing new policies, including: a. Identifying policy issues related to distributed learning; b. Formulating policy statements, rationales, and procedures making use of best practices and research findings; and c. Linking new e-learning policies with existing related institutional policies. 2. Utilize these tools and processes to develop a sample comprehensive institutional online learning policy and sample policy statements in three areas: universal design for learning, instructor development and support, and service delivery for online and off-campus learners identified from the two research studies. 3. Upon the request of a college/institute Vice-President, Academic (VPA), the Project Lead will work with personnel from four pilot institutions to support e-learning policy revision/development. Page 6 of 84 August 31, 2010

7 The project deliverables, as approved by the SC, include: 1. A toolkit designed to support institutional policy revision/development related to the delivery of services to online and off-campus learners with particular emphasis on diverse learners. The toolkit contains information about identifying policy issues; formulating policy statements, rationales, and guiding principles; stating regulations; and measuring policy performance. 2. A sample comprehensive institutional policy about the delivery of services to online and offcampus learners, with particular emphasis on diverse learners. 3. Three sample institutional policies about universal design for online learning, instructor development and support, and service delivery for online and off-campus learners. 4. Revised policies and/or new policies from four institutions that chose to be pilot sites for policy work. 5. A report including information about project background and rationale, goals, processes, the deliverables, and participants observations and reflections. This report will be made available to participating institutions, other Campus Alberta institutions, government ministries, and educational organizations in Alberta. It will also be deposited into appropriate educational databases. 6. An evaluation report including an assessment of the utility of the sample policies and the pilot institution policies as well as a developmental evaluation of project processes. Three points are important as background for understanding the report. First, using the language of the Roles and Mandates Framework for Alberta s Publicly Funded Advanced Education System (Alberta Advanced Education and Technology, 2007), the institutions participating in this project included seven comprehensive community institutions and one polytechnical institution. For the sake of brevity, the term college is used throughout this document to refer to all eight institutions. Second, the Project Statement for Phase II focuses on online and off-campus learners, recognizing the similarity of experiences for students who enroll in online courses from their homes or learn in small group, face-to-face cohorts at a satellite campus. Neither group has in-person access to main campus services and their institutions face similar challenges in meeting their needs. Again, for brevity, the term online is used throughout the document. Third, the Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners interim report (Shimoni & Barrington, 2010) defines diverse students as those students who are under-represented in traditional forms of education, and may require additional supports to be successful (p. 5). More specifically, the research focused on the needs of five sub-groups: Aboriginal students, students with disabilities or mental health issues, New Canadians for whom English is a second language, students who face barriers to education due to social and economic conditions, and rural students (p. 7). Page 7 of 65

8 2. Project Processes This section of the report contains a largely chronological overview of the processes that were utilized in developing and carrying out the project from the origins of the plan with BVC, the Steering Committee (SC), and ecampusalberta to the completion of this document containing the project deliverables. It describes linkages with the research studies; the collaborative nature of the project; the commitment from SC members, college leaders, and other college personnel; and a team effort on the part of academic and learner services personnel to improve services for online and off-campus learners. 2.1 Project Origins The Phase II Policy Project originated with the SC for the two studies described earlier. The original goal of phase II of the Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners study was to plan, pilot, and evaluate some solutions to problems or recommendations identified in the study at selected institutions. At their July 2010 meeting, committee members, representing the participating institutions, reviewed the key findings from the draft reports. The committee was asked to deliberate and choose which of the recommendations from the studies might be addressed in Phase II. The SC concluded that rather than piloting a particular strategy, it would be preferable to work towards policy changes that could provide the foundation for needed changes in institutions. As an outcome of the discussions at this meeting, Dr. R. Shimoni, Project Director, was asked to seek approval for a focus on policy for Phase II from Dr. T. Donovan, Executive Director, ecampusalberta as the funder for the project. In addition, the Project Team consulted with the committee regarding plans being developed for ongoing knowledge transfer work flowing from the Successful Practices study. The September 2010 SC meeting received and reviewed the conclusions and recommendations from the Successful Practices study and the interim report from the Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners study. Committee members were unanimous in their endorsement of the importance of the findings from both studies and the conclusions and recommendations from the Successful Practices study. In particular, they noted The strong student voice shows that students care about this topic, and colleges have a moral and ethical commitment to listen to these student voices (Bow Valley College, Sept. 9, 2010). The former study (Shimoni, Barrington, & Wilde, 2010, p. 3) contained the following conclusion and recommendation: Conclusion 4. Policies on all aspects of distributed learning are in short supply in Alberta s postsecondary institutions. Recommendation Given the lack of consistency in policies related to distributed learning, it is recommended that postsecondary institutions conduct a policy review to ensure that appropriate policy exists or is developed that can be applied equally to both distributed and traditional learning approaches. During the discussion of this conclusion and recommendation, committee members questioned The efficiency of individual colleges developing their own distributed learning policies.... A collaborative approach among institutions should be considered (Bow Valley College, Sept. 9, 2010). Page 8 of 84 August 31, 2010

9 Later in the meeting, the following direction was provided that the Research Team *from BVC+ draft a proposal, or overview, of what could be achieved in one year; what the role of the Steering Committee would be, and a preliminary identification of stakeholder group (Bow Valley College, Sept. 9, 2010). More specifically, direction was given to focus on policy change in Phase II including: A need for a policy framework developed collaboratively with decision makers in the system...the framework would be used by all colleges who could take the framework and tailor the policies to their meet their own organizational requirements (Ibid.). 2.2 Developing the Project Plan The Project Team presented a project plan to the SC at its November 2010 meeting. Dr. Shimoni indicated the plan identified four deliverables: a policy toolkit as a resource for institutions, sample policies in three areas, a sample comprehensive institutional policy, and institutionally specific policies developed as a part of the project. A fourth area - a comprehensive policy - was included based on earlier feedback from SC members who indicated that some institutions would prefer to develop only one policy to address all of the elements which would be included in the three previously identified topical areas. An analysis of the recommendations from the Successful Practices study was circulated and a recommendation made that the three sample policies include service delivery for online and offcampus students, universal design, and instructor development and support. A policy development workshop for SC members was suggested as a way of working collaboratively toward the deliverables. Dr. Shimoni indicated that Dr. Donovan had expressed support for this project on behalf of ecampusalberta. After endorsing the plan, the committee recommended that each SC member and vice-president, academic be contacted to determine commitment and area of interest. Throughout the discussion of the plan, Steering Committee members emphasized that Phase II is about ensuring a comparable experience for online learners and must relate to the needs of diverse learners (Bow Valley College, November 2010). Prior to the November SC meeting, Anna Kae Todd, Vice-President Learning, Bow Valley College, had presented a preliminary overview of the project to the Committee of Senior Academic Officers made up of the 17 vice-presidents, academic of Alberta s comprehensive community institutions, polytechnical institutions, and Mount Royal University and Grant MacEwan University. The eight participating institutions are members of this larger group. The vice-presidents provided general endorsement of the project but cautioned that any development of policy documents should be positioned as guidelines which could be a resource for institutions to adopt or adapt in relation to their context. In late November and early December, conversations were held with individual SC members. Each person had consulted with his/her Vice-President, Academic prior to the conversation and determined the institution s commitment to participate in the project and the continued participation of the individual SC member. The conversations focused on clarifying the nature of the project, identifying the college s role in the project and its potential benefits for the college, and considering which particular policy area the college and the SC member would like to work on. The level of commitment from the VPAs and the SC members was high. At the same time, the Project Team from BVC was developing the Project Statement and Project Workplan reflecting the findings and recommendations of the research studies, input from the November SC meeting, input from the executive sponsors at BVC, and conversations with individual SC members. The statement included project goals and objectives; deliverables; the scope of the project; evaluation; the project environment including assumptions, boundaries, risks and funding; and roles of responsibilities of each member of the Project Team, the Steering Committee, and the task teams. The Page 9 of 65

10 executive sponsors were identified as Anna Kae Todd, Vice-President, Learning, and Deborah Achen, Vice-President, Enrolment and Learner Services at Bow Valley College. The Project Stakeholders were identified as the Vice-Presidents, Academic at the participating institutions. The Project Workplan identified 14 project activities, assigned responsibilities, and scheduled the activities over the period November 2010 to July Reflecting the feedback provided by the Senior Academic Officers, the Project Statement contained the following statement: The processes undertaken and documents developed will recognize the principle of institutional autonomy in policy making as represented by the authority of academic councils and boards of governors. The work undertaken as a part of this project is designed to be a support to individual institutions as they deliver online and off-campus programming as a core part of their mandate and strategic directions. (2010) The draft project statement and workplan were distributed to the SC members in early December. The Project Team reviewed the documents with individual committee members from mid-december to early January. Committee members provided feedback including recommendations to carefully define the scope of the project, schedule project activities, and identify knowledge transmission processes. The two documents were revised reflecting the input from the SC members and distributed to the VPAs by the co-executive sponsors in late January. An additional part of these conversations with the SC members included a review of a preliminary plan for a policy development workshop to be held in February. In addition, each committee member was asked to indicate which policy team he/s he would like to participate in, as well as identify if his/her college wished to be one of the pilot colleges identified to develop an online learning policy for internal adoption. Five colleges eventually expressed an interest in participating in this policy development process. SC members were also invited to include additional representatives from their institutions as participants in the workshop. 2.3 Literature Review During the development of the Project Statement and Project Workplan, staff from the Office of Applied Research and Innovation at BVC conducted an exhaustive literature search regarding policy development and online learning. The data collection included an extensive search of the literature using multiple online databases and search engines. EBSCO Host, which includes Academic Search Complete and Academic Search Elite, and ERIC were the primary databases used, accompanied by Google Scholar, The Commonwealth of Learning, The UWide Policy Library, and other academic internet resources. Multiple search terms were used including characteristics, criteria, effective, policy, higher education, institutions/institutes, universal design, toolkit, distance, distributed, education, learning, support, services, student, learner, alternative, delivery, services, online, e-learning, virtual, post secondary, and diverse. This material was used to inform the development of the policy toolkit, provide samples of institutional policies, and provide reference materials to the teams when the workshop was held. Page 10 of 65

11 2.4 Policy Development Workshop The first major project activity was a policy development workshop held at Bow Valley College on February 17-18, All colleges had committed to participate, but one representative had to withdraw at the last minute. A total of 15 people from seven institutions participated along with the Project Team, a representative from ecampusalberta, and a representative from Alberta Advanced Education and Technology. The agenda for the workshop is presented in Appendix A. The workshop began with introductory activities and opening words from Vice-Presidents Anna Kae Todd and Deborah Achen as co-executive sponsors. Participants then discussed the role of policy in a college, the policy development process, and organizational change based on the materials provided in the toolkit. It was emphasized that one of the strengths of the project is that it brought together knowledgeable experts from both the academic and learner services divisions of the institutions. The primary activity for the workshop was the development of a sample comprehensive policy and sample policies in three topical areas as approved by the SC in November. All participants were a member of one of the four teams resulting in important cross-institutional collaboration in the development process. Each policy development team worked through a structured process which included three sessions brainstorming and drafting the ideas which should be included in a policy. After each session, the teams met in a large group and shared their development to date in order to benefit from collaboration, clarify ideas, and prevent duplication. Each team recorded its work on flip charts and detailed notes were made of the presentations and discussion during the large group sessions. A post-workshop evaluation survey was distributed to the participants. Feedback from seven respondents indicated a high level of satisfaction with the workshop. They felt that the toolkit including sample policies from other institutions had provided background for the process, and they were more familiar with the significance of policy in relation to online learning as well as becoming more proficient in developing policy themselves. 2.5 Developing Sample Policies and Pilot College Policies Once the workshop was completed, the second and third major project activities were undertaken. The second activity included the Project Lead drafting four sample policy documents reflecting the development work done by the teams at the workshop. Once each one was drafted, it was sent out to the team and an iterative process of consultation and revision began. Each team met by conference call to review the draft document. A second draft was then prepared and sent to the teams. Follow-up occurred by and individual telephone calls. The sample policies were reviewed with the SC at its June meeting. Five colleges had indicated an interest in developing policies for their own institutions. As a result, the initial plan for three pilot colleges was expanded to four, but project resources could only support four so BVC, as the lead college, chose to step aside from this process. The pilot colleges and their policy areas included: NorQuest College Universal design for learning Northern Alberta Institute of Technology Distributed learning Olds College Professional development and support for online facilitators and developers Red Deer College Learner services for e-learning Page 11 of 65

12 Each institution utilized a process most appropriate for its context. One drew together about 15 people who were involved in the particular policy area. A workshop was held to generate policy ideas, a policy was drafted, the team was brought back together to review the draft, and a final version was prepared. The other three institutions drew together teams of three to five people for the development process. The process at each college was led by a person, working under the direction of the VPA, who had participated in the February workshop and the draft documents reflect the ideas presented and developed at that workshop. The Project Lead met with each team one or two times and provided feedback on their draft documents. The policies from the pilot colleges presented in Appendix C will be submitted for policy approval within each institution during the fall of Throughout the project, numerous processes were utilized to communicate with the project stakeholders (the VPAs), Senior Student Services Officers, SC members, and workshop participants. Anna Kae Todd sent an update to the VPAs on one occasion and she and Deborah Achen sent updates to the VPAs and the Senior Student Services Officers on three occasions. The Project Director sent updates to the SC on at least three occasions. The SC met formally in June and reviewed the toolkit including the sample policies and provided input to the project evaluation process and plans for knowledge transfer. The Project Lead was in frequent contact with the teams developing the sample policies and the SC members leading the development process at the pilot colleges. Phase II of the Successful Practices project includes the development of a learner support e-toolkit which will serve as the key knowledge transfer process for that project. It will be organized into ten sections reflecting the core learner support services examined in the Successful Practices study. Each section will include a literature review, best practices and findings from the study. This electronic resource has been under development by BVC personnel during the time frame of this project. The two projects will be drawn even closer together by inclusion of the policy toolkit and the sample policies in the e-toolkit. This fulfills one of the earlier goals of the SC when there was recognition that services for online learners must have a policy foundation. 2.6 Deliverables A final word should be provided about the six deliverables as approved by the SC. This report contains deliverables one through four - Appendix B - including a policy toolkit to support institutional policy development or revision, three sample policies about universal design, instructor development and support, service delivery for online and off-campus learners. A sample comprehensive policy - the fourth policy document was developed as a model for those institutions that wished to include all of their policy statements in one document. Four draft policies - Appendix C - are included, consistent with the goals of the project, from NorQuest, Olds and Red Deer colleges and the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology. This report constitutes deliverable five. It does not include participants observations and reflections as identified in the project plan. The Project Team determined that it would be most appropriate to capture and report these as a part of an evaluation report. That report - deliverable six - is under preparation and will be completed later in 2011 and submitted to ecampusalberta as the funding agency, the SC, project stakeholders and the participants. Page 12 of 65

13 2.7 Project Limitations The SC is committed to the belief that the substantial investment of funds by ecampusalberta and Alberta Advanced Education and Technology for the research studies and by ecampusalberta for the Phase II policy project accompanied by the outstanding commitment of the SC and project teams will lead to significant positive change within institutions benefitting all learners participating in the range of delivery options now available. The Project Team and the SC will evaluate the impact of the project in approximately one year. At the same time, it is important to note that the success of the project may be affected by conditions beyond the control of the current participants. These conditions include the availability of resources for implementation of policy changes, turnover of personnel in the colleges, and the possibility of different priorities being established within institutions and the system. Page 13 of 65

14 3. Observations While the policy toolkit, the sample policies, and the draft policies make up the project deliverables, the Project Team believes it is important to review the project processes and record observations about the evolution of online learning, the development of related policy, and the advancement of learner services to support the growing numbers of online learners. Just as importantly, it is important to record observations about the collaborative processes associated with the project. The Team has reviewed the Phase II Policy Project work which began in July 2010 and identified nine observations. These are being presented as a part of the project report with the hope that they will serve as a foundation for future collaborative projects among post-secondary institutions, in general, and future online learning projects, in particular. 1. The two research studies which constitute the foundation for this project demonstrated that A college-wide paradigm shift, or significant shift in the way e-learning is conceptualized, is critical to implementing successful practices. College administrators, in particular, spoke of a need for a full commitment to distributed learning, and saw it as one of the biggest required changes in the PSI system. One of the metaphors used to describe this was it has to become part of our DNA. Most of the administrators interviewed indicated that we aren t quite there yet (Shimoni, Barrington, & Wilde, 2010, p. 54). The view is widely held among project participants that the studies represent a major milestone in the development of online learning among ecampusalberta member institutions, and, more broadly among Campus Alberta institutions, because the studies arose from a commitment to equivalent quality for online learners and off-campus learners particularly in the area of learner services. Additionally, there was recognition that a commitment to effective online learning requires an understanding of the needs and challenges of diverse learners. Underlying all of this is the awareness of the dramatic growth in online learning among ecampusalberta institutions as demonstrated by 13,107 course registrations in 2009/2010 compared to 2,300 in 2004/2005 (ecampus Alberta, n.d.). 2. Campus Alberta institutions, with the exception of Athabasca University, have developed as face-toface delivery institutions because that was their instructional modality. While distance education, in its various forms, has existed for decades, it is the arrival of online learning and the accompanying rapid enrolment growth that has created the challenge of creating new organizational structures and processes because the existing structures are not necessarily readily adaptable to this new delivery modality and learner group. 3. One project participant made a statement that captures the vision uniting all project participants: Distance learning must become front and center in the service delivery plan for each instructional and learner services department. While there have been rapid developments in the number of courses and programs offered and in the technology to deliver those courses and programs, there has not been, as a general rule, an equivalent development in the design and delivery of learner services and in the Page 14 of 84 August 31, 2010

15 integration of academic and learner services delivery. The desired state is captured by the concept of the bimodal college, which refers to institutions which provide both online and classroom delivery and are committed to provide equivalent instruction and learner services to both groups (Bottomley & Calvert, 2003; Hope, 2005). 4. The Project Processes section of this report outlines the SC s commitment to policy development as the mechanism for ensuring that online learners, and particularly diverse learners, experience equivalent quality in instructional and learner services delivery. Because policy, by its nature, makes institutional commitments to goals, identifies roles and accountabilities, and specifies coordination among departments, the SC saw policy as the vehicle to entrench online learning in college priorities and operations and foster the inter-departmental and inter-divisional coordination that is central to effective delivery of online instruction and learner services. 5. The four sample policy projects and the four pilot college projects directly or indirectly emphasized working backward from the needs of the online learner to identify the most appropriate approach to the delivery of learner services. Because online learners access those services from locations at a distance and often outside of standard college hours, existing on-campus services will not meet their needs. The challenge then becomes developing equivalent services which may be somewhat different in nature but have the same value, benefit, and impact for the learner. Similarly, diverse learners may require additional and/or customized services to ensure they receive the same benefit because of challenges and barriers. 6. Throughout the work undertaken by the policy development workshop, the sample policy teams, and the pilot college policy teams, it became apparent that effective online education requires a greater integration of instructional and service delivery than is often the case with face-to-face delivery. In an on-campus environment, students can readily connect with college services by visiting the offices and departments offering the services. Without the suggested integration, online learners at best are scrolling through telephone and website directories to find the desired service when, in fact, they may not be clear about what services would meet their needs or even what services exist. Project participants developed ideas about learning management system course shells which would include course structure, materials, and processes as well as identifying core services, from a learner s perspective, and including links to those services as a point of contact for the learner. A key finding from the Successful Practices study was that the instructor is the face of the institution for distributed learners which means Students look to instructors as the link to institutional services and their perception of the institution stems mainly from their interaction with them (Shimoni & Barrington, 2010, p. 61). As a result, the draft policies recognize the importance of providing particular support to instructors in that role. 7. As a part of the planning and execution for the Successful Practices study, Dr. R. Shimoni, Project Director, coined the phrase, the best practices behind the best practices, to describe the organizational and administrative structures and procedures which are necessary to ensure that best practice instructional and service delivery occur. By focusing on policy development, this project addressed the core underlying best practices necessary to bring about organizational change. Page 15 of 65

16 8. While the project has focused on online learners, there was widespread recognition among the participants that the service developments suggested by the policies in Appendix B and Appendix C will benefit all learners. First, on-campus learners, in all likelihood, will be able to access the services provided for online learners thus increasing flexibility and responsiveness for the on-campus group. Second, online learning, by its nature, requires a focus on quality, systematic instructional design and delivery, and integration of academic and service functions which will positively influence on-campus delivery. 9. Alberta s post-secondary system is committed to the principles and values espoused in Campus Alberta: A policy framework (Alberta Learning, 2002) which states that Campus Alberta reflects a new way of thinking... [recognizing] the advantages of the existing players in the system working together to better meet learners needs and improve the efficient use of available resources (p. 2). While the policy document predates the rapid development of online learning in Alberta, it states a directly relevant principle: Alberta learners have increased access to an array of quality and relevant learning opportunities that accommodate their other life goals and commitments (p. 3). Many aspects of the project embody the vision of Campus Alberta including the over-riding goal of enhanced services for online learners in a flexible learning environment, the inter-institutional SC and the sample policy teams, the development of sample policies to support the work of participating colleges and other ecampusalberta institutions, and the commitment to a broadly based knowledge transfer within the system. Page 16 of 65

17 4. Continuing Activities Activities related to this project will continue after the completion of this report. These will include: 1. Dr. Gail Barrington will conduct two evaluations related to the project. The first will be an evaluation, from the perspective of the stakeholders, of the process described in the report. The Project Team and ecampusalberta, as the funder, believe there is much to be learned about collaborative processes within and between post-secondary institutions, and these evaluations of process can enhance our ability to participate in or lead collaborations. The second evaluation will gauge the actual impact to the project on policy changes within colleges. 2. Phase II of the Successful Practices study includes the preparation of an e-toolkit to disseminate the research findings, provide institutions with the tools to assess their current practices, and increase their effectiveness in distributed learning. The e-toolkit is organized around the ten learner services identified in the Successful Practices study. The policy toolkit is linked to each of the ten services and is also presented as a standalone document. In this way, the two projects are further integrated and policy is presented as an integral foundation for service development and delivery. 3. The e-toolkit will be launched to Campus Alberta institutional leaders at a conference which will be held in October at Mount Royal University. 4. During the fall of 2011, members of the Project Team will visit each of the participating colleges to conduct an institutionally focused launch of the e-toolkit. The session will be organized by the SC member from that college under the direction of the VPA and will be of interest and relevance to all college staff involved in online learning. 5. Project Team members are planning to publish findings from this project in appropriate academic and professional journals. The policy toolkit will also be submitted to educational databases. 6. BVC is preparing a report summarizing the knowledge transfer activities which have occurred at individual colleges as a part of the two major projects. The report will be provided to the stakeholders and the funders. Page 17 of 84 August 31, 2010

18 References Alberta Advanced Education and Technology (2007). Roles and mandates policy framework for Alberta s publicly funded advanced education system. Retrieved from Alberta Learning (2002). Campus Alberta- A policy framework. Retrieved from Bottomley, J. & Calvert, J. (2003). Open and distance learning policy development (particular reference to dual mode institutions). Vancouver: The Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from Bow Valley College. (2010, July 9; 2010, September 9; 2010, November). Meeting the needs of diverse students engaged in e-learning; Successful practices in supporting students in distributed learning Steering Committee Meeting Minutes. ecampusalberta (n.d.) e-learning rubric: A resource for quality online curriculum creation. Retrieved from ecampusalberta (n.d.) Fast facts 2009/10. Retrieved from Hope, A. (2005). Factors for success in dual mode institutions. The Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from Shimoni, R. & Barrington, G. (2010). Meeting the needs of diverse students engaging in e-learning: Interim Report. Calgary: Bow Valley College,. Retrieved from Shimoni, R., Barrington, G., & Wilde, R. (2010). Successful practices in supporting students in distributed learning. Calgary: Bow Valley College,. Retrieved from Page 18 of 84 August 31, 2010

19 Appendices A Workshop Agenda B Policy Toolkit and Sample Policies Page 19 of 65

20 Appendix A Workshop Agenda Phase II Diverse Learners: Policy Project Policy Development Workshop February 17-18, 2011 Room 231, Bow Valley College Ave. S.E., Calgary Agenda February 17 (Thursday) February 18 (Friday) 8:00 a.m. 4:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m. 3:00 p.m. Thursday 8:00-8:30 Light breakfast 8:30-8:45 Opening remarks Anna Kae Todd, Vice-President, Learning, Bow Valley College 8:45-9:15 Introductions and round table Each participant will be asked to make a one minute comment about the future of online learning at his/her institution. 9:15-9:45 Review of workshop purpose, roles, processes and outputs 9:45-10:00 Refreshment break Karen O Dwyer will provide feedback on the Successful Practices and Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners studies in relation to Lethbridge College s distributed learning strategy. Eleanor Frandsen will make connections between this project and the ITM Policy Control Framework. 10:00-11:00 Discussion of toolkit materials on the role of policy and the process of policy making Lynn Connell will describe BVC s experience with developing a students rights and responsibilities policy. 11:00-12:30 Team session 1 Task teams begin policy development process. Session 1 includes purpose, scope and statement. 12:30-1:00 Lunch break 1:00-2:00 Group process Page 20 of 65

21 2:00-2:15 Refreshment break 2:15-4:00 Team session 2 Each task team shares the ideas developed in Session 1 for coordination and feedback. Task teams continue policy development process. Session 2 includes rationale and definitions. 4:00 Adjournment for the day Friday 8:00-8:30 Light breakfast 8:30-10:00 Group process 10:00-10:15 Refreshment break 10:15-10:45 Project evaluation 10:45-12:15 Team session 3 12:15-1:00 Lunch 1:00-2:30 Group process Each task team shares the ideas developed in Session 2 for coordination and feedback. Dr. Gail Barrington will discuss the developmental evaluation process which has been developed for this project. Task teams continue policy development process. Session 3 includes procedures Each task team shares the ideas developed in Session 3 for coordination and feedback. 2:30-3:00 Project process going forward and closing observations 3:00 Adjournment Deborah Achen, Vice President, Enrolment and Learner Services, Bow Valley College will provide concluding comments. Materials Please bring: 1. A copy of the toolkit and accompanying resources 2. Copies of the Successful Practices and Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners studies 3. One sample policy from your institution as a reference point for the discussions 4. Your institution s policy on policy making (if there is one) Page 21 of 65

22 Appendix B - Policy Toolkit and Sample Policies Page 22 of 84 August 31, 2010

23 Page 23 of 65

24 Page 24 of 65

25 Page 25 of 65

26 Page 26 of 65

27 Page 27 of 65

28 Page 28 of 65

29 Page 29 of 65

30 Page 30 of 65

31 Page 31 of 65

32 Page 32 of 65

33 Page 33 of 65

34 Page 34 of 65

35 Page 35 of 65

36 Page 36 of 65

37 Page 37 of 65

38 Page 38 of 65

39 Page 39 of 65

40 Page 40 of 65

41 Page 41 of 65

42 Page 42 of 65

43 Page 43 of 65

44 Page 44 of 65

45 Page 45 of 65

46 Page 46 of 65

47 Page 47 of 65

48 Page 48 of 65

49 Page 49 of 65

50 Page 50 of 65

51 Page 51 of 65

52 Page 52 of 65

53 Page 53 of 65

54 Page 54 of 65

55 Page 55 of 65

56 Page 56 of 65

57 Page 57 of 65

58 Page 58 of 65

59 Page 59 of 65

60 Page 60 of 65

61 Page 61 of 65

62 Page 62 of 65

63 Page 63 of 65

64 Page 64 of 65

65 Page 65 of 65