Distance Learning Doctoral Proposal - A Review

Transcription

1 TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD LEARNING TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING THECB Building, 1200 E. Anderson Lane, Board Room, First Floor Austin, Texas June 23, :00 a.m. 3:00 p.m. Membership Attendees: Remi Ademola Bill Angrove Michele Betancourt (A) Amy Burchett Corey Davis Michelle Durán Dawn Elmore Michael Gargano (A) Catherine Howard Todd Leach (A) Patsy Lemaster (A) Stephen Levey (A) Jake McBee (A) Pamela Morgan Sunay Palsole Sheri Pappas (A) Patrick Pluscht Pam Quinn Bill Robertson Jerry Sifuentes Pete Smith (A) Daniel Spencer Bhagya Srinivasan THECB Staff: Andrew Lofters Elizabeth Steele Rex Peebles Stacy Silverman James Goeman Jessica Acton Allen Michie Van Davis AGENDA 1. Welcome Pam Quinn Meeting began at 10:12 a.m. Quinn conducted meeting housekeeping issues, and advised group that some Agenda items might be done out of order, as LTAC quorum had not yet been met. Introductions were done both in person and on the phone. 2. Consideration / Approval of February 21, 2014 meeting minutes The LTAC members briefly reviewed the minutes. No comments or questions were made about the minutes. Motion took place after quorum convened (after below Item #4). Motion to approve Feb 21, 2014 LTAC meeting minutes: Pam Morgan. Motion seconded: Jerry Sifuentes. 3. Update on TWU OTD Proposal Andrew Lofters provided a brief update on the program and status. Confirmed that LTAC, CAWS, and the Board approved this program; it is the first OTD online in the state. There were no additional questions. 4. Discussion of Distance Education Doctoral Proposal Approval Process (was orig. agenda item #5) Lofters explained the current process for approving the different types of distance education programs. Asked committee to consider if changes or revisions needed to be done to this procedure. Described the current doctoral review subcommittee process (only LTAC subcommittee at present). Subcommittee reviews to ensure submitted proposal has all components needed to be brought before the LTAC. If a brand new program, it would also go through a regular doctoral approval process at the same time; this would also include either a

2 LTAC June 2014 Meeting Minutes - 2 desk review by an outside consultant, or a site visit. LTAC group would look at success and infrastructure in place for distance learning, and if it is viable. Asked LTAC if subcommittee process is something that should stay in place. Another procedure currently in place is when a brand new program is presented. The distance learning program director reviews it and then it submitted to the full LTAC for approval. If it is not the first one, then the program director can approve the process. Asked LTAC if processes needed to be improved for efficiencies. Comments and suggestions on improving the distance education approval process for doctoral programs were requested from the committee. Discussion took place on how to improve the process while keeping within the one year time limit (legislative rule). Lofters confirmed that the subcommittee was reenacted at the last LTAC committee. Pam Morgan described how process of subcommittee worked this round. LTAC can begin process concurrently with the regular doctoral approval process. Palsole suggested that perhaps schools that have successfully implemented distance doctoral programs may not need to be reviewed by the full LTAC. Lofters further suggested that perhaps programs that were in similar fields of already successful distance programs already in place. Morgan stated that this go round was just that, however, did not feel that this process was laborious. Goeman suggested that they have a certain length of time for having the program; such as whatever similar program was already in place might have already gone through this review. Quinn reminded group the quick advancement and changes of technology, sharing that in such a review period the technology and delivery my change distinctly. Palsole shared that the precedent programs that might be looked at as successful, would be considered successful on their continued growth and success; feels that LTAC time would be better helping newer programs. Morgan also suggested that format review be considered for submissions and applications. Pluscht queried the possibility that if this process was implemented, and subcommittee was bypassed, if issues of considered came up then the possibility of stalling during LTAC full meeting could occur. Discussion also covered possibility if a delay in LTAC approval happened; Peebles explained that it would be probable for tabling by CAWS or taking full proposal to Board. Decision was made to continue and monitor the current process. Spencer suggested that subcommittee provide report of process positives and negatives of experience throughout the year. Morgan described current process of subcommittee, sharing her positive perspective of experience, and further suggested that a standard format be considered for information to be provided. Lofters said he would look at format for future considerations. No motion was necessary. 5. Update on Joint GEAC/UEAC/LTAC Meeting (was orig. agenda item #4) Allen Michie provided an update. Discussed opportunity with both GEAC and UEAC. GEAC is on board. UEAC interested too, however would prefer a full meeting as opposed to a quorum meeting. Michie provided options of topics for joint discussion. Discussion took place about when the joint meeting should be held. Michie will work with GEAC for agenda and items of discussion. Seemed that logistically it would be scheduled so that one group would have their meeting in morning, joint meeting at lunch, and then second group meeting in afternoon. It was determined that September would be the best time to schedule a meeting. Coordination of meetings will be made. 6. Discussion / Proposed Distance Education Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Educational Leadership at Texas Tech University to be offered Online. Pamela Morgan provided a brief overview of the proposed program. Representatives (including Dr. Louder, Dr. Hartmeister, and Dr. Lock) from Texas Tech University (TTU) were available via phone to answer any questions. Pamela Morgan asked TTU to provide an overview of the difference between the EdD and PhD in Educational Leadership. The current EdD was approved

3 LTAC June 2014 Meeting Minutes - 3 for Distance Education by THECB in TTU shared the success of their current in place EdD program. Pamela Quinn asked about the training for the faculty and whether it is a requirement. TTU stated that training is not required but there are numerous resources available to faculty. Dr. Hartmeister shared that most of the faculty already teach online with the current EdD program. Bill Robertson asked how faculty are qualified to teach online. TTU College of Education does have measures in place to ensure faculty are qualified to teach online. Pamela Quinn asked about the status of Quality Matters (QM) in terms of faculty training. Dr. Louder described how TTU has gone through some curriculum reform in using an internal rubric to evaluate programs. The rubric is based on QM. QM is no longer using by TTU as they developed their own scorecard method/internal rubric. TTU offered it for review to LTAC group. Pluscht asked if the internal rubric addressed only structure or if it also addressed content. Suzanne Taft from TTU shared that it does address course design and structural issues, as well as ADA compliant, it is not related to content. 7. Consideration / Recommending Approval of Proposed distance Education Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Educational Leadership at Texas Tech University to be offered Online. Motion to recommend approval of Distance Education Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Leadership at Texas Tech University: Patrick Pluscht. Motion seconded: Amy Burchett. 8. Discussion / Proposed Distance Education Doctor of Education (EdD) in Instructional Technology at Sam Houston State University to be offered Online Morgan provided a brief overview of the proposed program. Representatives from SHSU included Dr. Marilyn Rice and Bill Angrove. Dr. Rice briefly explained the collaborative nature of the proposed degree program; explained how this model has been successful in the masters program. Quinn asked for clarification on how the courses are offered. Rice provided clarification on scheduling and modality. She further confirmed that faculty training is mandatory, that courses are offered in cohort, and that face-to-face is not required therefore everything is available online. Rice further shared that this is a process that was already in place with the masters program and has been successful. 9. Consideration / Recommending Approval of Proposed Distance Education Doctor of Education (EdD) in Instructional Technology at Sam Houston State University to be offered Online. Motion to recommend approval of Distance Education Doctor of Education in Instructional Technology at Sam Houston State University: Pam Morgan. Motion seconded: Michelle Duran. 10. Update on Institutional Survey (was orig. Agenda item # 11) Patrick Pluscht described the recommendations and feedback for improving the survey. Draft version of 22 questions was placed on Wiki; survey sub-committee was invited to review and comment. Sifuentes shared that some topics have been discussed on various list-servs and committees, etc. Pluscht described the feedback and suggestions received from the THECB Data/Collection committee. Robertson asked if there would be questions about specific programs, etc.; as well as if the survey will be beta tested with committee members. Confirmed that survey will be beta tested with LTAC group, maybe with Qualtrics. After finalized by LTAC, Lofters will take survey to Data/Collection committee for approval. Discussion and comments

4 LTAC June 2014 Meeting Minutes - 4 suggested for survey questions and format including consideration on demographic for survey, IT only, hybrid included, clarification of terminology/definition regarding difference between distance program and distance courses, etc. Additional discussion on whom the survey will be sent to at the schools as well as to whom will have access to view results. (Lofters will check this first.) Timeline proposed: test survey should be ready in about a week; LTAC will have about two weeks to respond and beta test survey; after which Lofters will present survey to Data/Collection committee for review and approval, before dissemination to institutions. Rex confirmed this recommendation. Motion to approve Institutional Survey timeline: Sunay Palsole. Motion seconded: Jerry Sifuentes. 11. Lunch From 12:13 p.m. to 12: 56 p.m. (was orig. Agenda item # 10) 11A. Announcements (not orig. on Agenda) Pluscht asked about adding Federal Financial Aid to Distance Learners as an Agenda item. Quinn confirmed will be discussed at end of meeting. Quinn shared upcoming event information National University Technology Network Conference in San Antonio (9/22-24/2014). The State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement is on the agenda. Marshall Hill will be a keynote at this conference. ( Quinn also shared that there is a New Virtual College of Texas Director Gary Abernethy based at Austin Community College replacing Ron Hartman who has retired. Henry Hartman has also retired, so Rick Walker will be replacing Henry on Starlink. 12. Update on Distance Education Database/Inventory Lofters confirmed that database has been cleaned up and is now in design phase, integrating it with the Program Inventory for all the institutions in Texas. The plan is to be up and running so institutions can confirm which programs are in effect and which ones are not. Would like the schools to have the ability to update their programs. Robertson queried about procedure if institutions wanted to make change. Lofters stated that according to rules, if program already exists, institutions can just update online as only needs Coordinating Board notification; where no area notification is required. For those who go to the queue, where staff has to work with it this would be a program that requires some type of area notification; i.e. off-campus face2face and electronic to group. These would require a 50-mile notification, 60-days prior. Lofters confirmed that IT is working with this (and map system), to confirm location and automatically send out notification and responses. It is a method being worked on to streamline process. Doctoral programs still have their own process. Ideally, Bachelors and masters will be able to interface with this portal. 13. Update on State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (SARA) Progress Quinn provided update on what is occurring on the National Council for State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (NC-SARA). Progress has been made on national level, met in May 2014 and have formed an advisory committee. The group is moving to be a 501c3 organization, and intend to be based in Colorado. They are reviewing the purpose of SARA across the regions, and eventually across the nation, they are also working with Department of Education on negotiating rulemaking sessions. Currently states are sweeping through IPEDs data; schools currently

5 LTAC June 2014 Meeting Minutes - 5 responsible for reporting their distance education students. SARA is focusing on consumer protection, including student s home state. Last NC-SARA notification indicated that 7 states have joined SARA. Cost is still unchanged (around $2k to $6k); dependent upon student enrollment. Quinn provided data listing states and current status on SARA. Quinn shared that an item being discussed at present is that the Dept. of Ed added two minimum thresholds that a school would not need to seek authorization if it offered 50%+ of post-secondary degree in distance education or correspondence in that state; and if it does not exceed an unduplicated headcount of 30 students/year. Dept. of Ed is recommending compliance by July 1, The Coordinating Board is expected to be designated as Texas SARA portal agency. Rex Peebles confirmed that the Coordinating Board needs to be authorized first through legislative action, as well as the definitions and language on existing Ch. 7 statutes; such as physical presence. It was speculated that it would probably be about a year till final versions come out. Questions and discussion on how to accelerate process for Texas as well as LTAC s role in prepping for legislature, were posed. LTAC agreed they do not want to miss the next legislative session to ensure that state has opportunity to join S-SARA, and for institutions to join NC-SARA. Motion to request Coordinating Board to report to LTAC at next meeting (planned for September 2014) on process to pursue legislature for institutions to join NC-SARA and for Texas to join S-SARA (Southern Region): Sunay Palsole. Motion seconded: Dawn Elmore. 14. Competency Based Education Presentation Dr. Van Davis provided background, definition, and process to date for Competency Based Education and the Coordinating Board. Provided comparison review of the Bachelor of Applied Science degree at Texas A&M University and South Texas College. Described how these programs and institutions are working together but keeping programs separate enough to be individually counted. Dr. Davis also further described how this process creates a self-paced program, since it is a competency based program. Dawn Elmore asked about Faculty models. Corey Davis queried about the impact on non-competency based students. Dr. Davis confirmed that competency based students are a different audience. Morgan asked about comparing this to completion degrees. Dr. Davis confirmed these are not the same. Dr. Davis further confirmed that this method is not great for all colleges, but that there is an audience for it. 14A. Other Financial Aid for the Distance Education Learner (not orig. on Agenda) Pluscht shared situation brought to his attention. A student from California may have to fly to Texas for an in person document verification to attend a Texas institution as a distance education student. Pluscht was told by his school that this seems to be new requirement from the Dept. of Ed. Apparently there is no precedence in place for financial aid federal document requirements for distance education students. LTAC agreed to keep this on their radar. 14B. Other Next LTAC Meeting (not orig. on Agenda) Cindy Valdez to confirm date with LTAC for next LTAC Meeting in September. Next meeting will need to be prior to the September CAWS meeting. 15. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 2:41 p.m.